The camaras in AZ take a picture of your license plate and the driver. I got snapped by one of those bad boys a couple years ago. I’m not a big fan of the things, but for the life of me, I cannot come up with a legitimate reason to do away with them.
They certainly slow speeders down. Here they did studies with and without the camaras (they left the radar on, but didn’t take photos for awhile), and the speeds were dramatically lower. Accidents declined as well.
In addition, you do have every right to go to court and fight the ticket. If you can prove you weren’t speeding or didn’t run the light, or it wasn’t you, you can have it removed. And really, is that any harder than if the police officer showed up to court and you had to prove him/her wrong?
I think the they seem unfair because if you get caught by a cop (who, by the way, may not have even clocked you), you know right away and maybe you can talk your way out of it, but I don’t see any infringement on our privacy by this tool.
People with bad credit hate credit records and scores, but if we didn’t have it, credit would not be available. It keeps people straight, just imagine what kind of a financial system we would have without credit scoring. The rate of our home ownership is what it is because credit scoring keeps people straight.
Same with traffic, we need to have a system to make sure our roadways safe. The more safe we can make them, the better. If anything goes, then we will be a third world country in no time. I know a bridge that is all Camera’d up, before people used to speed like crazy on it, now people drive the speed limit. The bottom line is, it works.
People who don’t like these things just want to flip of America and violate the laws and the system as they please at your expeonse and my expense. Enough is enough with some of people who push America around. Time to put these folks out of business and learn to play the game the way we all agree it should be played.
I don’t know if the poll is acurate or not, however “unbelievable” is obviously of the kind that this is not a subject for debate. Why be so insecure on your position? Turn down the anxiety and stop at red lights!
1,100 respondents now is a REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING of American opinion? Were they all police chiefs looking to generate easy revenue without adding officers? To think laws are passed on such ridiculous articles is laughable
As a former police officer, I think camera enforcement is bunk. Besides the inaccuracy of some cameras, people are encouraged to stop abruptly causing more accidents. This is just another money-making scheme by our out-of-control politicians looking for ways to steal our money through automation.
I want to live with my Mother-In-Law, be constrained by a straight jacket and force-feed brussel sprouts too. But this traffic enforcement non-sense really doesn’t affect me anyway because I ride my motor scooter to work. Although by law I must to wear a helmet, knee and elbow pads, proper reflective gear and a sign that reads, “run me over, I’m a sheeple”.
“Enough” is right! Any sampling you get from people who answer online surveys has to be as accurate as a sampling you get from people who post responses on this website.
Oh, the laws don’t apply to me. I am too important and can do anything I want. Obey the traffic laws like .00007% of the people in this country seem to do and you won’t have trouble. I have almost been in so many accidents because other drivers don’t stop at stop signs or red lights, cut me off or just speed as fast as their stupid cars can go. It’s another sign of the narcisism rampant in this country. My wants trample your laws anytime. The laws are stupid anyway and should be ignored. Right!
Dajani v. Governor of Md., No. CCB-00-713, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 982 (D. Md. Jan. 24, 2001) (unreported).
Facts: The defendant was charged with a photo red light violation and convicted. In this jurisdiction, photo red light violations are civil and not considered moving violations. Insurance companies may not consider the convictions.
Issue: The defendant appealed to the Federal district court, requesting the court declare the statute unconstitutional. The defendant alleged the photo red light statute violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
The court upheld the conviction on procedural matters (lack of Federal jurisdiction and lack of standing) without comment on the constitutional issues. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision. (Dajani v. Governor of Md., No. 01-1179, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17303 (4th Cir. 2001).
How about this. People that feel unsafe on the road: don’t drive.
Can we ship these people to Canada? Up there everyone drives the speed limit and would probably welcome more cameras from the government.
Then they can also get health care from the government like Michael Moore wants. Speaking of that fat a**, why doesn’t he just move to Canada? Oh wait, he’s profiting from freedom of speech, and other freedoms that he opposes… oh the irony. Whew… glad I got to vent about him, even though I know it’s not related.
thank you for your post. i wondered if anyone had tested it in court. i do not like red lite cameras just because it seems to infringe on my privacy. the vast majority of motorists do not intentionally run red lights and to do so is most likely a lapse in judgement. i make enough mistakes on a daily basis that i feel a touch down by the end of the day, anyway. then to open my mail and see a picture of me and a note telling me to send 400.00 for my mistake is not my idea of a good end of day. also, and this is what really frosts me, is the fact that the company that makes and installs the cameras makes 50 to 60 percent of the fine. this is a private company exploiting the misfortunes of people. if the city, county, or state want to install red lite cameras they can and i will not object-IF I KNOW that my fine is going to my county to pay the expenses of the county and not some private company preying off the misfortunes of others.
I was in the military and stationed in Germany from 1990 until 1992. While there I received a ticket for running a red light. Yes, they have these awful things in Germany and have had for a long time. In my case, a friend of mine was rotating back to the states and shipped his car back and needed to borrow a car for 30 days until he went home. I loaned him my car. A couple months after he left the country, I got a ticket in the mail for running a light with the auto I had loaned my friend. It was dated during the time he had been driving the auto. At the time, I believe I was fined about 50 German Marks. Wasn’t much money and I payed it rather than fight it. But this is just one of the problems with these things. I can’t believe anyone would think these things are ok.
First – it has been pretty well established that when you are out in public there is no expectation of privacy so the cameras have been held to be constitutional.
Second – If your car runs the red light should we just ignore the fact? I think not. It is a dangerous act that could well lead to injury and death. If you weren’t driving at the time, you know who was – get the fine money from them or have them go to court and admit their wrong doing.
Third – cameras won’t chase you in their speeding cop cars risking the rest of us.
Fourth – this could free up the police for more important tasks.
Fifth – cameras catching the speeders – check my comments on the red lights.
As you can tell – I am in favor of the cameras. Not only at the intersections with red lights, but around towns and cities so that the police can monitor the areas must better. Take a look at what has happened in England with a couple of bombings. They were able to crack the cases because of the cameras monitoring the city.
I disagree with these cameras being an infringement on your right to privacy…you driving a car irresponsibly and potentially hitting ME, well, that’s not so private anymore now is it?
When I think of privacy, I think of what you have the right to do in the privacy of your own home, i.e. things that don’t affect others…driving, on the other hand, can affect a whole lot of peole around you.
“the vast majority of motorists do not intentionally run red lights and to do so is most likely a lapse in judgement.”
For Pete sakes, if you are some who has a lapse in judgement and are capable of running the red light, get the hell off the road before you kill someone!
Right to privacy, give me a break! Can’t wait for Camera to be plastered in a every public area in America! We can put the thugs out of business once and for all.
Again, I ask, why does IJ even entertain such crap if the 1,100 people are the barometer of AMerican opinion. The people they are polling are driving 10 under in the left lane. What a frickin joke!
I know it’s hard to believe, but as long as the sample was random, the numbers work. The margin of error does change based on the size of the sample, but with a sample this size, the margin of error is pretty small (I can’t remember, but I think it’s +/- 3%).
Even though the majority of the posts on this site are against camaras, this site is hardly a representative sample of the U.S.
OK, pollster…..1,100 people as a random sample of millions of daily drivers…..get a clue…how many miles per day or year does this random sample drive, in what state and what age are they….sampling of this size is a joke yet our fine Congress believes any garbage put in front of them….do I need to bring up the ridiculous DUI laws in this country that are doing nothing to save lives onthe road but doing everything to tax social drinkers?….
unbelievable…I’m sorry that you have a problem with the math, but that’s how it works.
Now, you may have a problem with equal say for someone who drives once/week vs. someone that drives 10 times/day, but that’s a different issue. That’s a targeted poll interested in getting the opinion of a specific group (say republican vs. democrats).
Let’s say I drop 300,000,000 M&Ms in a gymnasium. If I randomnly pull out 1,100 of them, and there is a possibility that any given M&M is selected, I can tell you to a certain degree of certainty (again, I think it’s 3%) how many red ones are there. I know it’s hard to believe, but it works.
I think it’s a good possibility that eventually, there will be cameras covering every square inch of everything in this country considered “public”. So we might as well get used to it and stop scratching our butts when we think no one is looking.
As wacko as some of our representatives on the hill go… I think those Nosy Nellies would even like cameras in our homes. But that’s another rant for another day.
The cameras aren’t necessarily bad. I don’t know that they will serve as much of a deterrent. People who want to break the law are obviously willing to risk getting caught. If they want to trip up the camera, a simple alteration to their license plate will take care of that!
I’d like to see some real data about how EFFECTIVE existing cameras are.
Do they really reduce the rate of infractions? Do they really reduce the number of speeders? Have accident rates actually declined? Are police able to fight bigger and badder crimes? Are those ‘caught on tape’ being prosecuted fairly? Have repeat offenders stopped repeating?
Unless those questions (and more) are answered, there’s not enough information to make an educated and iron clad case for relying on these cameras for crime-stopping.
For the time being, I think traffic cameras only serve to create revenue for various parties.
Some of you have made great points about how cameras take away a person’s right to due process and how a snapshot of a license plate and vehicle doesn’t prove who was actually comitting the crime.
By having ‘electronic’ police, you’re only going to have half the story when it comes to an alleged crime. In other words, until the camera can undeniably prove who was behind the wheel, what can you really do?
You know after reading the guy from Arizona’s post maybe the electronic cops is not such a bad idea. I obey the rules of the road and watch all these crazies fly by me like they’re running the Indy 500 but then again they can afford the tickets and higher premiums as well.
As for you Mr Hawaii. I plead for the poor guy that is uneducated and trying to take care of themselves working a minimum wage job and /or the person who has fallen on hard times.
Believe me I dislike the irresponsible ying yang as much as the next guy but you have to think about people who have fallen on hard times medical,job loss. The credit rating system just isn’t right in my opinion to charge these people more!
If you blantantly skip out on things you know you’re responsible for then I agree hit them in the pocket but I haven’t seen one post yet that says they breakdown the credit record to adjust premiums one way or the next.
As for Arnie.
No anxiety there pal just statistical data.
Read it and weap or talk to Floridians!
Just listen to this fellow law enforcement officer.
He was/is in the very line of this debate and says this is just another scheme.
I agree with not doing it with traffic lights as this can cuase an unecessary accident.
Speeding! Another scam! Electronics are reliable but not failsafe
The government just wants to be more in your face as well as insurance companies. You know insurance companies will use this device to place you in high risk and raise premiums to MAKE EVEN MORE MONEY!
Damn they already have our medical info to charge us more for medical insurance.
They have our credit records to charge us more for auto insurance and they have mapped out areas of threat mind you not statistical areas where bad weather occurs to charge more for homeowners.
I bet the Mid West part of the Country are holding their breath right now. Get ready friends! Your premiums will be rising too.
If Insurance companies really wanted to charge us more, why have rates been coming down for 3 straight years?
What unsophisticated people don’t understand is that there is a market place out there. Insurance companies will find ways to undercut each other to win business. This current insurance market is cutthroat, the comsumer is winning like crazy.
Why don’t you trust the market place? Next time you are able to make more money because you got a better job offer, don’t take it because it is your obligation to work for less! Next time your home is on the market, and it is worth 200k more because of the marketplace, don’t take it, that would be too greedy!
Rid, you hit it on the nail, what “unbelievable” said is pathetic, if he really believes what he wrote, he needs to check himself into a mental instituion. Democrats or Republicans alike would not even remotely consider doing away with cops, a politician would be basically dumped by the voters if it even came out of his or her mouth.
I really hate big brother, I really hate that businesses in some states can’t decide if they want to allow smokers or not. But I really hate people that run red lights and speed, for no other purpose then they want to get some where 5 minutes faster. I used to stick right around 85 MPH, I would run the yellow/ red light if it suited me, I would tailgate, cut vehicles off, drive after a few pops or 12….
Finally after a few tickets, accidents, insurance rates through the roof, OMVI…. I learned that it really doesn’t pay.
Knowing that there are people on the roads acting like I used to, I want the cameras. It seems that only people that don’t want cameras are the people that are going to speed or run red lights. Privacy, the 6th, big brother.. come on be honest with yourself. You don’t want that letter/picture in the mail saying you owe 400 bucks, because you can’t control yourself, don’t care for yourself or others, or are just plain stupid. If you weren’t driving they allow you to state who was driving. If you don’t want to be a rat, you take the fall. And don’t tell me you don’t remember who was driving the vehicle. What do 100’s of people drive your vehicle every month?
If you don’t have anything to hide, why are you worried that you are being watched.
I love the argument that writing more tickets makes individuals feel safer on the roads. I feel safe because I pay attention while I drive. All the tickets and cameras in the world are not going to save lives if the public continues to drive while inattentive. I also do not feel any safer with a cop around than I do with a cop not around. Every time I see someone pulled over, I see another poor soul being charged more road taxes. For what? To support more safety enforcement where none is needed. Attentive driving is what is needed.
I coudn’t agree with you more. We not only need to get rid of traffic cops, we need to get rid of all cops. I know that one day everyone will be more attentive drivers (I think it may happen on Monday July 23). People need to stop killing each other, stop raping, and stop doing all other crimes, and yes, we no longer need cops. This will happen believe me it will, also pigs will soon start to fly. I am stupid!
Because it’s freakin communistic!
This is America.The land of the fre home of the bravenot some freaking monitored country like overseas.
You on the other hand did stupid things to cause stupid ideas like this. I don’t care if someone wathces but then again why should I be watched for the stupidty of others.
That’s the point!
This product makes it impossible for a video or still camera to take a legible photograph of your license plate number. However, your license plate still remains available for ordinary viewing by the police, other drivers, etc. Protects you from 360 degrees of photo-radar. Saves cash and your license! Fits U.S. and Canadian license plates. European, Australian and S. American versions coming soon. LIMITED TIME SALE…$6.99…Regularly…$9.99
Gee – How did they take the picture of the license plate fully readable if that device totally protects the license plate from viewing by cameras, etc.? If I can see it with my eyes, a camera can take the picture. Hell, with cameras you can take pictures of things the human eye cannot see, not the reverse.
Save you money, don’t be sucked in by this huckster. Or is you insist on making that purchase, I can give you a good price on a bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge that is.
Ray- It’s just a filter that uses 3M’s microlouver technology which makes objects visible to persons directly in front of the object, but not from the side.
However, you are correct about one thing, camera technology. Although we (humans) can capture all sorts of things, even from space, with highly advanced cameras, law enforcement agencies aren’t spending millions of dollars on such equipment.
The day that starts to happen, I’ll buy that bridge you own in NY.
Still – one ht license plate covering, one must be careful of state and local laws which may preclude covering the plates. Here is an example of the explanation for one state: “That law forbids display on a vehicle of plates “which have been in any manner changed, altered, disfigured or have become illegible. License plate frames may be used on vehicle license number plates,” it continues, “only if the frames do not obscure license tabs or identifying letters or numbers on the plates and the plates can be plainly seen and read at all times. It is unlawful to use any holders, frames, or any materials that in any manner change, alter, or make the vehicle license number plates illegible.”
It is obvious that the products which obscure the license number under certain circumstances would be illegal – at least in some areas. So, forwarned is forearmed…
In Albuquerque they have ticketed over 500 folks for having plate covers.
.. “the same people who will run off with their client’s premiums”.. say what HawaiiDuke888???? Your comparing theft with preventing a traffic camera from taking a picture of your license plate?
I do have my limits too Mr. HawaiiDuke888.
You speak like a former law enforcement person… Are you employed by Duane “Dog” Chapman? Do you have bleached mullet hair too?
Get real bozo the clown, why in the heck does the govt set national speed limits with the stroke of pen, and then not set limits on how fast automakers will make their cars go?
I call it built in soource of revenue for the states.
My biggest concern with red light cameras is that they aren’t always set up just for enforcement, but also set up as money makers.
If they want to improve safety, lengthen the yellow lights as has been recommended by many of the insurance panels. Instead red light cameras frequently have shorter yellow light cycles. There can only be one explanation for that… money.
Gee… where did I see this before? Hmmm… oh yeah… MythBusters.
They don’t work, the best MythBusters were able to get was partially blocking 2 numbers (at extreme angle). The California patrolman who assisted with the expiriment disclosed that they would still be able to issue a ticket by doing a search on the 5 clearly visible characters after doing a serach to match registration to vehicle type.
Bottom line: Don’t speed, don’t run red lights, don’t loan your car out. They can put cameras on every street corner for all I care, if I brake the law I deserve a ticket.
The point is if you don’t want a ticket don’t speed and don’t run a red light. It is really that easy. Does this have to do with money, sure. I learned the hard way and luckly no one got hurt. But if there is tool that can help people slow down and pay more attention, then I’m all for it.
Why would someone be against this? Privacy, you’re in public. I could stand on the sidewalk and take your picture all day. I know a little creepy, but you get the idea.
I obey the traffic laws, unconditionally. I don’t speed, I let approaching cars pass, I get at the back of the line when merging….I hope that these cameras can also take pix of those who drive in the passing lane, talk on the cellphone and hold a line of cars hostage by not getting over to the right; this is my daily commute and it is always a slow-go because of some dang blabbermouth who just HAD to call someone while they were busy; can you imagine these idiots using the phone when sitting on the pot? Talk about running your mouth….just like the runs from their butts….
so, we come to the endless conversation and question of did you or did you not do something illegal? u know when u go through a red light, knowing full well, that light was yellow for a long time. u know that travelling faster than anyone else only saves u what 2 mins or so? so you wasted fuel to go faster and wear/tear on your veh to get by me.
in reality, if you see how the europeans do, if you loan the car out (as by a prev entry – you are responsible)…why not?, it would behoove you to be more cautious to whom you lend your car to….
my only discretion is why can’t the cops/sheriffs abide by the same laws we do driving? one of my pet peeves!!!
cameras, why the big issue — if you wanted privacy stay at home and never ever go out again…what you do in public is displayable!!!
fyi: i work for an insurance company…and in reality, if you track record (incl camera tickets), shows you to be a risk — then you shud have a higher rate!…
These folks who don’t want any enforcement are the same people who will run off with their client’s premiums. Anything goes with these people, they never learned to respect the laws. If they did, they would not want to handcuff every law enforcement tools we have. Nevertheless, I wish them the best of luck trying to.
What’s the difference between a cop sitting and waiting for someone to speed through a red light or using these cameras? Not much, but in the long run, it’s probably cheaper.
If these cameras can be proven to keep the roads safer, i guess I would have to say i am for it…
but speaking of cameras and an invasion of privacy, what about google earth? haven’t they come out saying you can now see objects that are larger than 12 inches? i have more of a problem with voyers than i do someone trying to keep the streets safe to drive on.
(sorry, i’m bored and still at work at 5 on friday….)
Too true. There truly is no difference between the cop and the camera, except if the cop doesn’t show you get out of the ticket. My dad has received a couple camera tickets, and it has improved his driving. I’m for them, but then again I follow traffic laws the bulk of the time (can’t say always because that would be a lie, but I try).
Most people aren’t responding to the cell phone bit – I wish to put in my .25 cents. It’s a problem with society – in a couple of ways. Yes we feel we should always be connected but that’s the way business is. We no longer accept that someone is out of touch because they left the office; that person should pick up their cell phone. It has been proven that talking on a cell phone with a hands-free device is just as distracting as talking into a handset which is just as bad as driving drunk, but neither is any of those different than talking to passengers (I wish I could pull the study for it).
The second issue with society is we push ourselves way too much. I can’t tell you how many people I’ve almost killed because I was too tired to drive. I also can’t tell you how many people I’ve saved because instead of just driving, I was talking on my cell phone and that gave me enough concentration on the road to get to where I could pull over. I worked graveyard for 6.5 years. You feel fine at the beginning of the shift, but at the end there are days you should not be on the road. We’ve all experienced this. Talking on the cell phone has saved lives. I don’t know how many, but at least mine.
I don’t agree with regulating cell phone usage in cars. People will go to hands-free devices that do not provide any more protection to fellow drivers but are impossible to pull people over for. Instead we should go after them for the driving behavior – swerving, improper merging, accidents, speeding, you name it. It usually pays to go for the cause, but in this case going for the symptom will be easier and should make people think about the individual causes.
Sorry for the length. I too am at work way too late on Friday.
The camaras in AZ take a picture of your license plate and the driver. I got snapped by one of those bad boys a couple years ago. I’m not a big fan of the things, but for the life of me, I cannot come up with a legitimate reason to do away with them.
They certainly slow speeders down. Here they did studies with and without the camaras (they left the radar on, but didn’t take photos for awhile), and the speeds were dramatically lower. Accidents declined as well.
In addition, you do have every right to go to court and fight the ticket. If you can prove you weren’t speeding or didn’t run the light, or it wasn’t you, you can have it removed. And really, is that any harder than if the police officer showed up to court and you had to prove him/her wrong?
I think the they seem unfair because if you get caught by a cop (who, by the way, may not have even clocked you), you know right away and maybe you can talk your way out of it, but I don’t see any infringement on our privacy by this tool.
People with bad credit hate credit records and scores, but if we didn’t have it, credit would not be available. It keeps people straight, just imagine what kind of a financial system we would have without credit scoring. The rate of our home ownership is what it is because credit scoring keeps people straight.
Same with traffic, we need to have a system to make sure our roadways safe. The more safe we can make them, the better. If anything goes, then we will be a third world country in no time. I know a bridge that is all Camera’d up, before people used to speed like crazy on it, now people drive the speed limit. The bottom line is, it works.
People who don’t like these things just want to flip of America and violate the laws and the system as they please at your expeonse and my expense. Enough is enough with some of people who push America around. Time to put these folks out of business and learn to play the game the way we all agree it should be played.
I don’t know if the poll is acurate or not, however “unbelievable” is obviously of the kind that this is not a subject for debate. Why be so insecure on your position? Turn down the anxiety and stop at red lights!
1,100 respondents now is a REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLING of American opinion? Were they all police chiefs looking to generate easy revenue without adding officers? To think laws are passed on such ridiculous articles is laughable
I’ll translate this article into everday language: The government wants more money so they’ll get it anyway they can. End of story.
I’m sure that anyone that has time to take online surveys is probably not an accurate sampling.
I would be fine with red light enforcement since there is no reason to run a red light, but speeding???
As a former police officer, I think camera enforcement is bunk. Besides the inaccuracy of some cameras, people are encouraged to stop abruptly causing more accidents. This is just another money-making scheme by our out-of-control politicians looking for ways to steal our money through automation.
I want to live with my Mother-In-Law, be constrained by a straight jacket and force-feed brussel sprouts too. But this traffic enforcement non-sense really doesn’t affect me anyway because I ride my motor scooter to work. Although by law I must to wear a helmet, knee and elbow pads, proper reflective gear and a sign that reads, “run me over, I’m a sheeple”.
Did they forget about that one? Is the judge going to ask the camera what it witnessed?
And tag numbers don’t tell you anything about WHO was driving the vehicle…
I agree with all of you. This is ABSURD.
Sixth Amendment: Know it. Live it. Love it.
“Enough” is right! Any sampling you get from people who answer online surveys has to be as accurate as a sampling you get from people who post responses on this website.
Oh, the laws don’t apply to me. I am too important and can do anything I want. Obey the traffic laws like .00007% of the people in this country seem to do and you won’t have trouble. I have almost been in so many accidents because other drivers don’t stop at stop signs or red lights, cut me off or just speed as fast as their stupid cars can go. It’s another sign of the narcisism rampant in this country. My wants trample your laws anytime. The laws are stupid anyway and should be ignored. Right!
This is the electronic age, it is a very cost efficient way to police trafic. It’s keeps the scums clean or in jail.
Dajani v. Governor of Md., No. CCB-00-713, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 982 (D. Md. Jan. 24, 2001) (unreported).
Facts: The defendant was charged with a photo red light violation and convicted. In this jurisdiction, photo red light violations are civil and not considered moving violations. Insurance companies may not consider the convictions.
Issue: The defendant appealed to the Federal district court, requesting the court declare the statute unconstitutional. The defendant alleged the photo red light statute violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
The court upheld the conviction on procedural matters (lack of Federal jurisdiction and lack of standing) without comment on the constitutional issues. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision. (Dajani v. Governor of Md., No. 01-1179, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17303 (4th Cir. 2001).
How about this. People that feel unsafe on the road: don’t drive.
Can we ship these people to Canada? Up there everyone drives the speed limit and would probably welcome more cameras from the government.
Then they can also get health care from the government like Michael Moore wants. Speaking of that fat a**, why doesn’t he just move to Canada? Oh wait, he’s profiting from freedom of speech, and other freedoms that he opposes… oh the irony. Whew… glad I got to vent about him, even though I know it’s not related.
thank you for your post. i wondered if anyone had tested it in court. i do not like red lite cameras just because it seems to infringe on my privacy. the vast majority of motorists do not intentionally run red lights and to do so is most likely a lapse in judgement. i make enough mistakes on a daily basis that i feel a touch down by the end of the day, anyway. then to open my mail and see a picture of me and a note telling me to send 400.00 for my mistake is not my idea of a good end of day. also, and this is what really frosts me, is the fact that the company that makes and installs the cameras makes 50 to 60 percent of the fine. this is a private company exploiting the misfortunes of people. if the city, county, or state want to install red lite cameras they can and i will not object-IF I KNOW that my fine is going to my county to pay the expenses of the county and not some private company preying off the misfortunes of others.
I was in the military and stationed in Germany from 1990 until 1992. While there I received a ticket for running a red light. Yes, they have these awful things in Germany and have had for a long time. In my case, a friend of mine was rotating back to the states and shipped his car back and needed to borrow a car for 30 days until he went home. I loaned him my car. A couple months after he left the country, I got a ticket in the mail for running a light with the auto I had loaned my friend. It was dated during the time he had been driving the auto. At the time, I believe I was fined about 50 German Marks. Wasn’t much money and I payed it rather than fight it. But this is just one of the problems with these things. I can’t believe anyone would think these things are ok.
My feelings:
First – it has been pretty well established that when you are out in public there is no expectation of privacy so the cameras have been held to be constitutional.
Second – If your car runs the red light should we just ignore the fact? I think not. It is a dangerous act that could well lead to injury and death. If you weren’t driving at the time, you know who was – get the fine money from them or have them go to court and admit their wrong doing.
Third – cameras won’t chase you in their speeding cop cars risking the rest of us.
Fourth – this could free up the police for more important tasks.
Fifth – cameras catching the speeders – check my comments on the red lights.
As you can tell – I am in favor of the cameras. Not only at the intersections with red lights, but around towns and cities so that the police can monitor the areas must better. Take a look at what has happened in England with a couple of bombings. They were able to crack the cases because of the cameras monitoring the city.
I disagree with these cameras being an infringement on your right to privacy…you driving a car irresponsibly and potentially hitting ME, well, that’s not so private anymore now is it?
When I think of privacy, I think of what you have the right to do in the privacy of your own home, i.e. things that don’t affect others…driving, on the other hand, can affect a whole lot of peole around you.
And I agree with you completely Ray. Especially your third reason.
“the vast majority of motorists do not intentionally run red lights and to do so is most likely a lapse in judgement.”
For Pete sakes, if you are some who has a lapse in judgement and are capable of running the red light, get the hell off the road before you kill someone!
Right to privacy, give me a break! Can’t wait for Camera to be plastered in a every public area in America! We can put the thugs out of business once and for all.
Again, I ask, why does IJ even entertain such crap if the 1,100 people are the barometer of AMerican opinion. The people they are polling are driving 10 under in the left lane. What a frickin joke!
Unbelievable,
I know it’s hard to believe, but as long as the sample was random, the numbers work. The margin of error does change based on the size of the sample, but with a sample this size, the margin of error is pretty small (I can’t remember, but I think it’s +/- 3%).
Even though the majority of the posts on this site are against camaras, this site is hardly a representative sample of the U.S.
OK, pollster…..1,100 people as a random sample of millions of daily drivers…..get a clue…how many miles per day or year does this random sample drive, in what state and what age are they….sampling of this size is a joke yet our fine Congress believes any garbage put in front of them….do I need to bring up the ridiculous DUI laws in this country that are doing nothing to save lives onthe road but doing everything to tax social drinkers?….
unbelievable…I’m sorry that you have a problem with the math, but that’s how it works.
Now, you may have a problem with equal say for someone who drives once/week vs. someone that drives 10 times/day, but that’s a different issue. That’s a targeted poll interested in getting the opinion of a specific group (say republican vs. democrats).
Let’s say I drop 300,000,000 M&Ms in a gymnasium. If I randomnly pull out 1,100 of them, and there is a possibility that any given M&M is selected, I can tell you to a certain degree of certainty (again, I think it’s 3%) how many red ones are there. I know it’s hard to believe, but it works.
I think it’s a good possibility that eventually, there will be cameras covering every square inch of everything in this country considered “public”. So we might as well get used to it and stop scratching our butts when we think no one is looking.
As wacko as some of our representatives on the hill go… I think those Nosy Nellies would even like cameras in our homes. But that’s another rant for another day.
The cameras aren’t necessarily bad. I don’t know that they will serve as much of a deterrent. People who want to break the law are obviously willing to risk getting caught. If they want to trip up the camera, a simple alteration to their license plate will take care of that!
I’d like to see some real data about how EFFECTIVE existing cameras are.
Do they really reduce the rate of infractions? Do they really reduce the number of speeders? Have accident rates actually declined? Are police able to fight bigger and badder crimes? Are those ‘caught on tape’ being prosecuted fairly? Have repeat offenders stopped repeating?
Unless those questions (and more) are answered, there’s not enough information to make an educated and iron clad case for relying on these cameras for crime-stopping.
For the time being, I think traffic cameras only serve to create revenue for various parties.
Some of you have made great points about how cameras take away a person’s right to due process and how a snapshot of a license plate and vehicle doesn’t prove who was actually comitting the crime.
By having ‘electronic’ police, you’re only going to have half the story when it comes to an alleged crime. In other words, until the camera can undeniably prove who was behind the wheel, what can you really do?
Anyone remember “innocent until proven guilty”?
You know after reading the guy from Arizona’s post maybe the electronic cops is not such a bad idea. I obey the rules of the road and watch all these crazies fly by me like they’re running the Indy 500 but then again they can afford the tickets and higher premiums as well.
As for you Mr Hawaii. I plead for the poor guy that is uneducated and trying to take care of themselves working a minimum wage job and /or the person who has fallen on hard times.
Believe me I dislike the irresponsible ying yang as much as the next guy but you have to think about people who have fallen on hard times medical,job loss. The credit rating system just isn’t right in my opinion to charge these people more!
If you blantantly skip out on things you know you’re responsible for then I agree hit them in the pocket but I haven’t seen one post yet that says they breakdown the credit record to adjust premiums one way or the next.
As for Arnie.
No anxiety there pal just statistical data.
Read it and weap or talk to Floridians!
Just listen to this fellow law enforcement officer.
He was/is in the very line of this debate and says this is just another scheme.
I agree with not doing it with traffic lights as this can cuase an unecessary accident.
Speeding! Another scam! Electronics are reliable but not failsafe
The government just wants to be more in your face as well as insurance companies. You know insurance companies will use this device to place you in high risk and raise premiums to MAKE EVEN MORE MONEY!
Damn they already have our medical info to charge us more for medical insurance.
They have our credit records to charge us more for auto insurance and they have mapped out areas of threat mind you not statistical areas where bad weather occurs to charge more for homeowners.
I bet the Mid West part of the Country are holding their breath right now. Get ready friends! Your premiums will be rising too.
If Insurance companies really wanted to charge us more, why have rates been coming down for 3 straight years?
What unsophisticated people don’t understand is that there is a market place out there. Insurance companies will find ways to undercut each other to win business. This current insurance market is cutthroat, the comsumer is winning like crazy.
Why don’t you trust the market place? Next time you are able to make more money because you got a better job offer, don’t take it because it is your obligation to work for less! Next time your home is on the market, and it is worth 200k more because of the marketplace, don’t take it, that would be too greedy!
Rid, you hit it on the nail, what “unbelievable” said is pathetic, if he really believes what he wrote, he needs to check himself into a mental instituion. Democrats or Republicans alike would not even remotely consider doing away with cops, a politician would be basically dumped by the voters if it even came out of his or her mouth.
I really hate big brother, I really hate that businesses in some states can’t decide if they want to allow smokers or not. But I really hate people that run red lights and speed, for no other purpose then they want to get some where 5 minutes faster. I used to stick right around 85 MPH, I would run the yellow/ red light if it suited me, I would tailgate, cut vehicles off, drive after a few pops or 12….
Finally after a few tickets, accidents, insurance rates through the roof, OMVI…. I learned that it really doesn’t pay.
Knowing that there are people on the roads acting like I used to, I want the cameras. It seems that only people that don’t want cameras are the people that are going to speed or run red lights. Privacy, the 6th, big brother.. come on be honest with yourself. You don’t want that letter/picture in the mail saying you owe 400 bucks, because you can’t control yourself, don’t care for yourself or others, or are just plain stupid. If you weren’t driving they allow you to state who was driving. If you don’t want to be a rat, you take the fall. And don’t tell me you don’t remember who was driving the vehicle. What do 100’s of people drive your vehicle every month?
If you don’t have anything to hide, why are you worried that you are being watched.
I love the argument that writing more tickets makes individuals feel safer on the roads. I feel safe because I pay attention while I drive. All the tickets and cameras in the world are not going to save lives if the public continues to drive while inattentive. I also do not feel any safer with a cop around than I do with a cop not around. Every time I see someone pulled over, I see another poor soul being charged more road taxes. For what? To support more safety enforcement where none is needed. Attentive driving is what is needed.
I coudn’t agree with you more. We not only need to get rid of traffic cops, we need to get rid of all cops. I know that one day everyone will be more attentive drivers (I think it may happen on Monday July 23). People need to stop killing each other, stop raping, and stop doing all other crimes, and yes, we no longer need cops. This will happen believe me it will, also pigs will soon start to fly. I am stupid!
Because it’s freakin communistic!
This is America.The land of the fre home of the bravenot some freaking monitored country like overseas.
You on the other hand did stupid things to cause stupid ideas like this. I don’t care if someone wathces but then again why should I be watched for the stupidty of others.
That’s the point!
This product makes it impossible for a video or still camera to take a legible photograph of your license plate number. However, your license plate still remains available for ordinary viewing by the police, other drivers, etc. Protects you from 360 degrees of photo-radar. Saves cash and your license! Fits U.S. and Canadian license plates. European, Australian and S. American versions coming soon. LIMITED TIME SALE…$6.99…Regularly…$9.99
http://hackershomepage.com/section2.htm
Gee – How did they take the picture of the license plate fully readable if that device totally protects the license plate from viewing by cameras, etc.? If I can see it with my eyes, a camera can take the picture. Hell, with cameras you can take pictures of things the human eye cannot see, not the reverse.
Save you money, don’t be sucked in by this huckster. Or is you insist on making that purchase, I can give you a good price on a bridge, the Brooklyn Bridge that is.
Ray- It’s just a filter that uses 3M’s microlouver technology which makes objects visible to persons directly in front of the object, but not from the side.
However, you are correct about one thing, camera technology. Although we (humans) can capture all sorts of things, even from space, with highly advanced cameras, law enforcement agencies aren’t spending millions of dollars on such equipment.
The day that starts to happen, I’ll buy that bridge you own in NY.
Still – one ht license plate covering, one must be careful of state and local laws which may preclude covering the plates. Here is an example of the explanation for one state: “That law forbids display on a vehicle of plates “which have been in any manner changed, altered, disfigured or have become illegible. License plate frames may be used on vehicle license number plates,” it continues, “only if the frames do not obscure license tabs or identifying letters or numbers on the plates and the plates can be plainly seen and read at all times. It is unlawful to use any holders, frames, or any materials that in any manner change, alter, or make the vehicle license number plates illegible.”
It is obvious that the products which obscure the license number under certain circumstances would be illegal – at least in some areas. So, forwarned is forearmed…
In Albuquerque they have ticketed over 500 folks for having plate covers.
.. “the same people who will run off with their client’s premiums”.. say what HawaiiDuke888???? Your comparing theft with preventing a traffic camera from taking a picture of your license plate?
I do have my limits too Mr. HawaiiDuke888.
You speak like a former law enforcement person… Are you employed by Duane “Dog” Chapman? Do you have bleached mullet hair too?
Get real bozo the clown, why in the heck does the govt set national speed limits with the stroke of pen, and then not set limits on how fast automakers will make their cars go?
I call it built in soource of revenue for the states.
My biggest concern with red light cameras is that they aren’t always set up just for enforcement, but also set up as money makers.
If they want to improve safety, lengthen the yellow lights as has been recommended by many of the insurance panels. Instead red light cameras frequently have shorter yellow light cycles. There can only be one explanation for that… money.
Gee… where did I see this before? Hmmm… oh yeah… MythBusters.
They don’t work, the best MythBusters were able to get was partially blocking 2 numbers (at extreme angle). The California patrolman who assisted with the expiriment disclosed that they would still be able to issue a ticket by doing a search on the 5 clearly visible characters after doing a serach to match registration to vehicle type.
Bottom line: Don’t speed, don’t run red lights, don’t loan your car out. They can put cameras on every street corner for all I care, if I brake the law I deserve a ticket.
The point is if you don’t want a ticket don’t speed and don’t run a red light. It is really that easy. Does this have to do with money, sure. I learned the hard way and luckly no one got hurt. But if there is tool that can help people slow down and pay more attention, then I’m all for it.
Why would someone be against this? Privacy, you’re in public. I could stand on the sidewalk and take your picture all day. I know a little creepy, but you get the idea.
I obey the traffic laws, unconditionally. I don’t speed, I let approaching cars pass, I get at the back of the line when merging….I hope that these cameras can also take pix of those who drive in the passing lane, talk on the cellphone and hold a line of cars hostage by not getting over to the right; this is my daily commute and it is always a slow-go because of some dang blabbermouth who just HAD to call someone while they were busy; can you imagine these idiots using the phone when sitting on the pot? Talk about running your mouth….just like the runs from their butts….
so, we come to the endless conversation and question of did you or did you not do something illegal? u know when u go through a red light, knowing full well, that light was yellow for a long time. u know that travelling faster than anyone else only saves u what 2 mins or so? so you wasted fuel to go faster and wear/tear on your veh to get by me.
in reality, if you see how the europeans do, if you loan the car out (as by a prev entry – you are responsible)…why not?, it would behoove you to be more cautious to whom you lend your car to….
my only discretion is why can’t the cops/sheriffs abide by the same laws we do driving? one of my pet peeves!!!
cameras, why the big issue — if you wanted privacy stay at home and never ever go out again…what you do in public is displayable!!!
fyi: i work for an insurance company…and in reality, if you track record (incl camera tickets), shows you to be a risk — then you shud have a higher rate!…
These folks who don’t want any enforcement are the same people who will run off with their client’s premiums. Anything goes with these people, they never learned to respect the laws. If they did, they would not want to handcuff every law enforcement tools we have. Nevertheless, I wish them the best of luck trying to.
Reggie, you have your limits? Why do you allow them to put a license place on your car?
As far as “Bozo the clown,” why would an intelligent guy like yourself cheapen your image by getting emotional over this?
Hey RReggie–get a grammar lesson and then perhaps someone might take you seriously.
your = your (possessive)
you’re = you are
Nothing strengthens your argument like a stupid elementary school error. Think before you speak.
As for Dog, at least someone makes the low lifes pay. Mullet or no mullet, he gets the job done. And well, I may add.
What’s the difference between a cop sitting and waiting for someone to speed through a red light or using these cameras? Not much, but in the long run, it’s probably cheaper.
If these cameras can be proven to keep the roads safer, i guess I would have to say i am for it…
but speaking of cameras and an invasion of privacy, what about google earth? haven’t they come out saying you can now see objects that are larger than 12 inches? i have more of a problem with voyers than i do someone trying to keep the streets safe to drive on.
(sorry, i’m bored and still at work at 5 on friday….)
Too true. There truly is no difference between the cop and the camera, except if the cop doesn’t show you get out of the ticket. My dad has received a couple camera tickets, and it has improved his driving. I’m for them, but then again I follow traffic laws the bulk of the time (can’t say always because that would be a lie, but I try).
Most people aren’t responding to the cell phone bit – I wish to put in my .25 cents. It’s a problem with society – in a couple of ways. Yes we feel we should always be connected but that’s the way business is. We no longer accept that someone is out of touch because they left the office; that person should pick up their cell phone. It has been proven that talking on a cell phone with a hands-free device is just as distracting as talking into a handset which is just as bad as driving drunk, but neither is any of those different than talking to passengers (I wish I could pull the study for it).
The second issue with society is we push ourselves way too much. I can’t tell you how many people I’ve almost killed because I was too tired to drive. I also can’t tell you how many people I’ve saved because instead of just driving, I was talking on my cell phone and that gave me enough concentration on the road to get to where I could pull over. I worked graveyard for 6.5 years. You feel fine at the beginning of the shift, but at the end there are days you should not be on the road. We’ve all experienced this. Talking on the cell phone has saved lives. I don’t know how many, but at least mine.
I don’t agree with regulating cell phone usage in cars. People will go to hands-free devices that do not provide any more protection to fellow drivers but are impossible to pull people over for. Instead we should go after them for the driving behavior – swerving, improper merging, accidents, speeding, you name it. It usually pays to go for the cause, but in this case going for the symptom will be easier and should make people think about the individual causes.
Sorry for the length. I too am at work way too late on Friday.