Rick 67 #26 November 17, 2009 QuoteQuote>Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) In Orlando, the person who owns the car is responsible, to pay the fine, but if they cant match the face no points are given. Total BS But wow what a revenue source, from the Orlando Sentinel: City officials acknowledge the cameras make money: Orlando collected about $2.4 million in fines between Sept. 1, 2008, when the cameras were installed, and Oct. 31, 2009, according to a spokeswoman.You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,148 #27 November 17, 2009 And a purely anecdotal (i.e. my) observation is that the number of people running the light with cameras on it where I live has gone down. Normally, when I go through what I consider to be a doubtful light, there is at least one person behind me, and often two . It's pretty endemic here. And I really don't think I see it as much. Do the ends justify the means? Nope. But sometimes it's not an unmitigated disaster on all fronts. Wendy P. There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #28 November 17, 2009 I agree I don't really think the end justify's the means but running red lights has become a real problem here. I have even heard people say "when the light turns yellow only 2 more cans care go through" where do people come up with this stuff?? You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #29 November 17, 2009 The problem with red light cameras is the corporation who runs them is on commission. This leads them to pressure the authorities to tighten the criteria for getting a ticket. When they brought them into British Columbia (owner fine, no points) the criteria was laid out- if your rear bumper is in the intersection when it turns red, no ticket. As long as that remains the case I am in favour of them. After all intersections are where the accidents happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #30 November 17, 2009 I am not sure how true this is but there was an article in Sunday's Orlando Sentinel about a anti-red light camera protest. One of the protesters said the police were issueing tickets for infractions that would not be issued if a police officer were there. Such as stopping with your bumper past the white line and not waiting long enough after stopping to turn red. Again I personally don't know if this is true. Anybody??You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #31 November 17, 2009 Quote I agree I don't really think the end justify's the means but running red lights has become a real problem here. I have even heard people say "when the light turns yellow only 2 more cans care go through" where do people come up with this stuff?? The REAL problem is that we have too many traffic lights, many of which have been programmed by morons. If traffic lights were not such sources of delay and congestion, people would be less likely to run them. When did we ever decide that we would accept control by government issued robots anyway?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #32 November 18, 2009 Quote The REAL problem is that we have too many traffic lights, many of which have been programmed by morons. If traffic lights were not such sources of delay and congestion, people would be less likely to run them. well, when cities screwed with the length of yellows next to these cameras, certainly a problem. But the perceived need for these cameras came because collectively too many of us are driving like assholes. Unlike the general speeding, this does lead to a lot of accidents. I routinely see people run not recent reds, but full out reds, and I avoided two certain accidents on my motorcycle that would have been very painful for me. Unfortunately, no easy answers to this problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #33 November 18, 2009 Quote>In Orlando, the person who owns the car is responsible, to pay the fine, but >if they cant match the face no points are given. Interesting. I wonder how they justify that one? (Although in terms of costs, fines are generally cheaper than points in the long run.) No points in Iowa. Just number of violations"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
d16842 0 #34 November 18, 2009 QuoteQuote>Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) not true. They (at least here in Iowa) they take a picture of the plate. The owner gets the ticket. And the courts have upheld it here. That is the law in Ohio as well, but a Cleveland law firm is taking a new position to court. Nobody that leases a car is the legal owner. The leasing company, or a holding firm is. Should be interesting to watch.Tom B Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 November 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote>Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) not true. They (at least here in Iowa) they take a picture of the plate. The owner gets the ticket. And the courts have upheld it here. That is the law in Ohio as well, but a Cleveland law firm is taking a new position to court. Nobody that leases a car is the legal owner. The leasing company, or a holding firm is. Should be interesting to watch. Should be VERY interesting!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #36 November 18, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) not true. They (at least here in Iowa) they take a picture of the plate. The owner gets the ticket. And the courts have upheld it here. That is the law in Ohio as well, but a Cleveland law firm is taking a new position to court. Nobody that leases a car is the legal owner. The leasing company, or a holding firm is. Should be interesting to watch. Should be VERY interesting! Isn't there verbiage in the leasing contracts making the leasee responsible for any penalties? Certainly the case for rental cars, and I'd expect it to be here as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
virgin-burner 1 #37 November 18, 2009 Quote Quote Quote >Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) In Orlando, the person who owns the car is responsible, to pay the fine, but if they cant match the face no points are given. Total BS But wow what a revenue source, from the Orlando Sentinel: City officials acknowledge the cameras make money: Orlando collected about $2.4 million in fines between Sept. 1, 2008, when the cameras were installed, and Oct. 31, 2009, according to a spokeswoman. haha, and how many people live in orlando!? the city police of zurich (300'000 people, our biggest city), collects every year about 15 million dollars in fines.. “Some may never live, but the crazy never die.” -Hunter S. Thompson "No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try." -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #38 November 18, 2009 QuoteIsn't there verbiage in the leasing contracts making the leasee responsible for any penalties? Certainly the case for rental cars, and I'd expect it to be here as well. Yeah, but that's civil/contractual liability to the leasing company - not statutory liability to the state under its motor vehicle laws. Yes, the Ohio case should be very interesting. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #39 November 18, 2009 QuoteYeah, but that's civil/contractual liability to the leasing company - not statutory liability to the state under its motor vehicle laws. Yes, the Ohio case should be very interesting. And in Texas the RLC aren't able to issue actual traffic citations. The company issues a civil fine. There is an appeals you can use, but you are not able to have a jury of your peers hear your case. IMO, as they are implemented in Texas, the RLC violate your civil rights.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdthomas 0 #40 November 18, 2009 I am not sure about the swab on a window, but do know that the police dog can be used and often times is problematic. Excoworker pulled over one night, cop suspects pot because he had a box of dryer sheets in his car and excoworker has a record of petty theft. Coworker does not concent to a car search and cop calls in dog to sniff over car. dog arrives, "hits" on the hood of the car, dogs reaction to scent is to scratch, so this guys hood was thrashed out because the cop lets the dog scratch for a long period of time, maybe because the lack of consent on the search???? Anyway, car is then torn apart late at night and the police find nothing at all, the police have to let him go. coworker has to gather all his stuff off the side of the road and car is trashed out pretty bad, the scratch marks from the dog ruined the hood and needed a repaint. coworked sued city, he lost in court because something like hazards of a nonconsent. some BS like that.www.greenboxphotography.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,145 #41 November 18, 2009 QuoteAnd a purely anecdotal (i.e. my) observation is that the number of people running the light with cameras on it where I live has gone down. Here in Toronto, red light cameras are installed at very limited intersections and all those intersections are high collision intersections. After implementation of the RLC, the number of minor fender-benders increased. However, the number of collisions with injuries and fatalities decreased. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #42 November 18, 2009 Quote Quote Quote >Same question I have about speeding and stop light cameras They take a picture of you. If the picture matches your driver's license ID, you get a ticket. If they can't see you, you don't. (Or more accurately, you may still get one - but it will be easy to beat in court.) not true. They (at least here in Iowa) they take a picture of the plate. The owner gets the ticket. And the courts have upheld it here. That is the law in Ohio as well, but a Cleveland law firm is taking a new position to court. Nobody that leases a car is the legal owner. The leasing company, or a holding firm is. Should be interesting to watch. Lets hope But, I didnt think the SC would uphold the Kelo case either"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #43 November 18, 2009 Sorry, I did not mean to high jack your thread "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
