The government is keeping track of our movements as well who are we are talking to. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/1 ... 10770.html

funny thing, a person here at work was just pulled over a few days ago because of one of these license plate readers! Turns out his insurance had lapsed (insurance agent error, not the person I work withs error). In talking to the Cop about it, the officer was VERY friendly and showed him the whole set up and explained it to him. Turns out he runs about 10,000 plates each day!

I am not in favor of growing the size and power of government. That is a modern liberal construct.

We have a governor who wants to increase taxes based on the number of miles we drive and wants to install a chip on every vehicle to verify this. Again, that is a modern liberal notion.

The last time I was in Denver, I received a speeding ticket.

Here's the trick: no police officer ever spoke with me. I was not stopped. I had no idea I was being ticketed.

Two months after I got home, I received a note from the rental company that I owed them $30. Why? Because I had received a ticket.

"No, I didn't," I thought.

I followed the instructions and eventually saw a picture of me driving.

The "ticket" was issued by a "technician," not an officer. He was driving in a nearby van. The time, date, and location were all noted. I was also told this would not go on my record. The fine was $50.

So, here's the dilemma: is it worth the money to go back and contest something that will not appear on my driving record? Of course not.

Do I think they know this?

Yes I do.

This is a tax. It is a violation of my Constitutional rights. How can I have a fair trial when the matter is insignificant and I receive no notice for a few months? Can anyone remember how fast they were driving at any particular time two months ago?

It's a tax masquerading as law enforcement.

I'm sure they issue dozens of these every day. I'm equally sure that someone is going to file a class-action lawsuit and make a bundle for a law firm.

Totally agree with you, DF. That's a ridiculous ticket--I thought red light camera tickets were bad.

freeman3 wrote:Totally agree with you, DF. That's a ridiculous ticket--I thought red light camera tickets were bad.

It's so bad that I'm confident it will eventually be found illegal. I just wish I could be there to jump up and down. I've rarely been so angry. It's not the amount of money because that's not significant. There is a principle involved and it's really one of the more foundational of our country. I felt like I'd been mugged.

Doctor Fate wrote:

freeman3 wrote:Totally agree with you, DF. That's a ridiculous ticket--I thought red light camera tickets were bad.

It's so bad that I'm confident it will eventually be found illegal. I just wish I could be there to jump up and down. I've rarely been so angry. It's not the amount of money because that's not significant. There is a principle involved and it's really one of the more foundational of our country. I felt like I'd been mugged.

Long story ... about 15 months ago we rented a car in FL ... we were running late and I made a right on red without stopping (although I did slow down) ... 60 days later we received a letter from the rental car company with a $30 fine which I paid ... we then received a ticket from the municipality in Florida for $288 (running a red light) ... the insurance cost on these things is even higher over the years because it changes your rating, so in the end, a ticket like this can cost you $1,000 ... I was directed to a website where I could see 2 pictures and a video of the car running the red light ... it was an impressive video of my rental car ... the next 2 days after receiving the ticket, we received 8 solicitations from law firms in Dade County (where we were on vacations) offering to represent us (somehow the public record is sold or available to private companies) ... I hired one of the attorneys for $60 (they must make their living on volume) ... he said it was a 50/50 case since our car did slow down and I was a clearly cautious driver, if not a technically correct one ... either way on the outcome his fee was fixed ... I figured it was worth spending $60 to save at least $288 so I hired him ... he beat the ticket (I guess by convincing the judge (or whomever) ... so the $60 was all I paid.

The whole experience was bizarre.

Can you imagine if cities put scanners everywhere so if you violated the speed limit at any time you would get a ticket? There is a case coming before the California supreme court on red light tickets, but hearsay has been one of the main arguments (though right to confront witnesses is another one) Maybe you could argue it is a violation of due process because since you are not made aware of the citation you are denied the ability to adequately fight it.
These modern day speed traps need to be stopped, somehow. Government needs to raise money in legitimate ways.

freeman3 wrote:Can you imagine if cities put scanners everywhere so if you violated the speed limit at any time you would get a ticket? There is a case coming before the California supreme court on red light tickets, but hearsay has been one of the main arguments (though right to confront witnesses is another one) Maybe you could argue it is a violation of due process because since you are not made aware of the citation you are denied the ability to adequately fight it.
These modern day speed traps need to be stopped, somehow. Government needs to raise money in legitimate ways.

Could not agree more. If revenue is the issue, then raise taxes in a straightforward manner or cut expenditures.

At least with a red light, there is some objectivity (although I understand the yellow lights have been shortened in some municipalities). However, with a "speeding citation" how can one ever know? Is it possible I was 10 mph over the speed limit? Maybe, but I don't know. I was able (because this was shortly after I'd landed) to reconstruct part of it. However, by my calculations, I would have just left the parking lot of a burger joint.

Is it possible they ticketed me after checking the registration and finding out it was a rental? Yes.

Why would they do that? Because there is NO chance of anyone fighting it.

It smells like "scam."

RJ, that attorney would probably have a bunch of other tickets in the court where your ticket was in, so he probably does ok (but $60 is pretty cheap, even so). The attorney probably pays a service that collects information on citations (they are public records ) and then mails mass solicitations. I don't know how he beat it, seems like you were guilty, but perhaps the officer (who shows up to handle numerous red light tickets) did not feel like being grilled by an attorney over a borderline ticket.

freeman

Can you imagine if cities put scanners everywhere so if you violated the speed limit at any time you would get a ticket?

The average speed on the streets would slow.
That happened in Toronto when the speed cameras were in place for a period .

I wouldn't have a problem with this if the speed limits made sense. At the moment, most road speed limits don't ....Far too low in most cases.
The reason we give out speeding tickets, that is enforce speeding limits, is to try and limit dangerous speeding. The occassional enforcement by officers that occurs now, isn't really all the effective in reducing average speed limits. Plus, it puts trained police in a role that doesn't contribute to public safety all that much. Certainly not as much as automatic cameras...

Police officers who do make traffic stops put themselves into danger often.... and often create dangerous events on the roads. particularly on expressways. So the cameras do have the benefit of contributing to greater safety for officers and for motorists generally.

Those are the positives. if those are the reasons cities do it, it makes sense. If they do it just to raise revenue its obscene.
And its also unfair in some circumstance... Like slowing, rather than stopping, for a right turn red light when there is absolutely no traffic... Those kind of situations may have too much nuance for an automatic system like cameras...
But speeding? Its cut and dry.
with appropriate speed limits, cameras are more effective at generating the desired result ... slower average speed. and safer for everyone involved..

not so sure it always makes people safer. I know those red light cameras has forced people to stop fast, they cause back ups that in turn cause other accidents as well. When you slow things down too much, it makes people irate and makes them do stupid things like dangerous lane changes and the like. So the desired safety is not always the end result. Municipalities all say these things are for the sake of safety, but we all know they simply want increased revenue, nothing more! Find me a city that did this for safeties sake and you will have found a city trying to fool us!

Doctor Fate wrote:I am not in favor of growing the size and power of government. That is a modern liberal construct.

We have a governor who wants to increase taxes based on the number of miles we drive and wants to install a chip on every vehicle to verify this. Again, that is a modern liberal notion.

The last time I was in Denver, I received a speeding ticket.

Here's the trick: no police officer ever spoke with me. I was not stopped. I had no idea I was being ticketed.

Two months after I got home, I received a note from the rental company that I owed them $30. Why? Because I had received a ticket.

"No, I didn't," I thought.

I followed the instructions and eventually saw a picture of me driving.

The "ticket" was issued by a "technician," not an officer. He was driving in a nearby van. The time, date, and location were all noted. I was also told this would not go on my record. The fine was $50.

So, here's the dilemma: is it worth the money to go back and contest something that will not appear on my driving record? Of course not.

Do I think they know this?

Yes I do.

This is a tax. It is a violation of my Constitutional rights. How can I have a fair trial when the matter is insignificant and I receive no notice for a few months? Can anyone remember how fast they were driving at any particular time two months ago?

It's a tax masquerading as law enforcement.

I'm sure they issue dozens of these every day. I'm equally sure that someone is going to file a class-action lawsuit and make a bundle for a law firm.

Simple question:

Do you know if you were exceeding the speed limit or not?

GMTom wrote:not so sure it always makes people safer. I know those red light cameras has forced people to stop fast, they cause back ups that in turn cause other accidents as well.

And does people running red lights keep things safe?

When you slow things down too much, it makes people irate and makes them do stupid things like dangerous lane changes and the like. So the desired safety is not always the end result.

It doesn't 'make' them do anything. They choose to, the morons.

Municipalities all say these things are for the sake of safety, but we all know they simply want increased revenue, nothing more! Find me a city that did this for safeties sake and you will have found a city trying to fool us!

How about you prove this by showing what's happened to accident and death rates with and without such measures being put in.

Or should we just take your word for it as an expert?

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:I am not in favor of growing the size and power of government. That is a modern liberal construct.

We have a governor who wants to increase taxes based on the number of miles we drive and wants to install a chip on every vehicle to verify this. Again, that is a modern liberal notion.

The last time I was in Denver, I received a speeding ticket.

Here's the trick: no police officer ever spoke with me. I was not stopped. I had no idea I was being ticketed.

Two months after I got home, I received a note from the rental company that I owed them $30. Why? Because I had received a ticket.

"No, I didn't," I thought.

I followed the instructions and eventually saw a picture of me driving.

The "ticket" was issued by a "technician," not an officer. He was driving in a nearby van. The time, date, and location were all noted. I was also told this would not go on my record. The fine was $50.

So, here's the dilemma: is it worth the money to go back and contest something that will not appear on my driving record? Of course not.

Do I think they know this?

Yes I do.

This is a tax. It is a violation of my Constitutional rights. How can I have a fair trial when the matter is insignificant and I receive no notice for a few months? Can anyone remember how fast they were driving at any particular time two months ago?

It's a tax masquerading as law enforcement.

I'm sure they issue dozens of these every day. I'm equally sure that someone is going to file a class-action lawsuit and make a bundle for a law firm.

Simple question:

Do you know if you were exceeding the speed limit or not?

Honestly, no, I don't know. I was not consciously speeding. It's not like I was in a hurry. I was just driving in moderate traffic and not trying to "win."

When you're just driving, I doubt too many people can state with any accuracy whether or not they were speeding some two months after the date in question. I am dubious of the claim I was 10 mph over the limit, but I can neither prove nor disprove it. How could I?

There is something inherently invasive about having the government be able to examine our every activity in public for possible violations of law that outweighs any utilitarian calculations as to money and lifes saved. Even if DF went over the speed limit, it doesnt matter-- driving would be incredibly tedious if we had to keep checking our speed constantly (for one thing it would not be safe) to avoid tickets.