Why Aren't Automatic Speeding Tickets Issued?

[jimbee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley They already have them pretty much everywhere, although I guess not where you are. IMO, the main reason not to have them is because this is supposed to be a free country where we aren't under surveillance 24/7.

Um, it may be too late.

[W2R]

We had them here nine years ago,, but they didn't hold up in court for some reason. I'm not sure exactly why. Then, after they didn't hold up, there were lawsuits. What a mess. So, eventually they took the cameras down.

[Running_Man]

Why stop at tickets for speeding, why not facial identification for littering, jaywalking. Why not computers on cars for improper lane changes, failure to properly signal. I would think the government could set up computer systems to enforce any number of fines and regulations on the books and make the world a safer and cleaner place for all.

Anyone who has seen what Volkswagen has done to pass government regulations and then insist that computerizing tickets is the way to go seems to be ignoring human nature and computer systems. The assumption is that the computer must be right but with the right programmer you can get any answer you desire.

[jim584672]

They set up speed cameras in school speed zones near me. So many people got tickets and upset that the politicians got an earful, the result, no more speed cameras in school zones.

[harley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 I don't get the 'slippery slope' arguments. These are laws. I don't see how enforcing them creates a 'slippery slope'. On the contrary, I think NOT enforcing laws creates a slippery slope of 'training' people they can 'get away' with breaking the law. Being in a 'free country' doesn't mean you are free to break the law, does it? Sometimes there can be a slippery slope if a law kinda interferes with our freedoms, so people get used to that, and they pass another law that interferes a step further. But these laws exist, and for good reason IMO.

You May Think You Have Nothing to Hide ... But You Are Still Breaking Laws Which Government Spying Could Discover and Use Against You Washington's Blog

[growerVon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sengsational I drove around the uk for a week before I figured out what this sign meant, lol!

That's funny! I had the same experience this summer driving in Scotland and, until near the end of the vacation, thought they denoted picture taking spots. Of course I was fairly white-knuckled, it being my first time driving there, and couldn't give much focus to the impressive countryside; so thanks to the antique-camera signs I built this delusion that there were TONS of picturesque spots along the roads... which there really kind of were

[Fermion]

Slightly speeding doesn't cause accidents. Texting while driving, eating while driving, lack of sleep, impairment due to drugs/alcohol. Those are the primary causes and we only stop people for the drugs/alcohol (sometimes). I have never heard a news report about an accident that said so and so was going 58mph in a 55mph zone and this led to a 6 car pileup.

[Fishingmn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Running_Man Why stop at tickets for speeding, why not facial identification for littering, jaywalking. Why not computers on cars for improper lane changes, failure to properly signal. I would think the government could set up computer systems to enforce any number of fines and regulations on the books and make the world a safer and cleaner place for all. Anyone who has seen what Volkswagen has done to pass government regulations and then insist that computerizing tickets is the way to go seems to be ignoring human nature and computer systems. The assumption is that the computer must be right but with the right programmer you can get any answer you desire.

This is exactly right. Why do people feel like they need to legislate how others behave when it doesn't impact them?

If you want cameras, robots and the government to regulate my actions yours are going to come under scrutiny next - and we all lose some of our freedoms over time.

[chemist]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bamaman I got radar'd on the causeway going over to Venice for 1.2 mph over the ridiculously low speed limit, and it cost $155 wired to the city's checking account in Euros. And Hertz hit Visa for $45 service charges for telling the city of Venice who was the driver and my address. The cameras are all over Italy and France.

They were all over the Netherlands when I lived there in 1995-1996. Of course if you were local you quickly learned where they were so they only trapped people from out of the area or new to the area.

[Which Roger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 I've often wondered this as well. There is some controversy over the red-light cameras (mostly bogus, IMO - IF the proper controls are in place), but speeding seems even easier to catch. And in places like IL, where you have a transponder to auto pay tolls, why can't they say " Hey, you covered those last 10 miles at a rate that is 15 mph over the limit - ticket!". -ERD50

Regarding the red light cameras, the "IF the proper controls are in place" part is the key. There are so many cases where the system has been abused by the politicians and contractors that a lot of people, myself included, have little faith that "proper controls" can ever happen.

Regarding the transponders, to bill me correctly, the toll authority has to know that I passed by the checkpoint. But they don't need to know any more than that, and I don't think they (or any other governmental entity) have any right to put all of the data points together to figure out my travel patterns.

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Running_Man Why stop at tickets for speeding, why not facial identification for littering, jaywalking. Why not computers on cars for improper lane changes, failure to properly signal. I would think the government could set up computer systems to enforce any number of fines and regulations on the books and make the world a safer and cleaner place for all. ...

Sounds good to me. The things you mention lead to unsafe conditions (OK, littering may not be a safety issue, but I'd love to see those jerks fined out of existence - throw it in a trash can!). Those are reasonable laws, I'd say. Let's enforce them.

Quote:

Anyone who has seen what Volkswagen has done to pass government regulations and then insist that computerizing tickets is the way to go seems to be ignoring human nature and computer systems. The assumption is that the computer must be right but with the right programmer you can get any answer you desire.

Corruption existed before modern technology. It is the corruption that must be addressed. Doesn't it seem that body cameras, dash cameras and surveillance cameras have done far more to uncover corruption than they have been used in corruption schemes? These tools are routinely helping us get the bad guys. Do you really think they are routinely being misused to entrap innocent citizens?

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley You May Think You Have Nothing to Hide ... But You Are Still Breaking Laws Which Government Spying Could Discover and Use Against You Washington's Blog

That seems more like a case for taking stupid laws off the books. What the point of a law that is not enforced?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fermion Slightly speeding doesn't cause accidents. Texting while driving, eating while driving, lack of sleep, impairment due to drugs/alcohol. Those are the primary causes and we only stop people for the drugs/alcohol (sometimes). I have never heard a news report about an accident that said so and so was going 58mph in a 55mph zone and this led to a 6 car pileup.

I think that has been addressed repeatedly in this thread. The proposed (and existing) systems do not ticket for a few mph over the 'limit'.

If we could catch distracted/impaired driving, that would be wonderful. Ask anyone who has been or knows someone who was affected by one of these drivers - I'm sure they would like their life/mobility back if that driver was stopped from driving.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishingmn This is exactly right. Why do people feel like they need to legislate how others behave when it doesn't impact them? If you want cameras, robots and the government to regulate my actions yours are going to come under scrutiny next - and we all lose some of our freedoms over time.

But we are talking about behavior that does affect us! Again, we are not 'free' to break the law! That's a misuse of the important word 'freedom'.

-ERD50

[Nodak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harley They already have them pretty much everywhere, although I guess not where you are. IMO, the main reason not to have them is because this is supposed to be a free country where we aren't under surveillance 24/7. As Koo'lau's sig line says, anything that can be misused will be. Also they tend to be used more for increasing income vs. safety, just like the red light cameras, which have actually increased dangerous rear-end accidents. Here is a list of some objections to speed cameras. Here is a study from Britain showing that raises doubt over their effectiveness. But I still stand by my main objection, which is the slippery slope issue of massive surveillance. Soon they'll have cameras in your freezer monitoring your Ben and Jerry's consumption. Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me.

+1

[audreyh1]

DH got a speeding ticket once from a camera. We saw the flash go off and new it was too late.

Funny thing is, once we got the ticket, had gone through all the trouble to pay it by mail. DH wasn't the one driving. We got a notice it had been dismissed because the setup had been determined not to be legal. And later got whatever we sent in back.

[meierlde]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrayHare In the US, per the 6th Amendment citizens have the right to confront their accuser in criminal cases. Though speeding is not a criminal offense, in general I don't wish humans to become servile to robotic accusers.

It depends on the state in Tx it is a class C misdemenor, so it is regarded as a crime. (equivalent to stealing less than $5)

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audreyh1 DH got a speeding ticket once from a camera. We saw the flash go off and new it was too late. Funny thing is, once we got the ticket, had gone through all the trouble to pay it by mail. DH wasn't the one driving. We got a notice it had been dismissed because the setup had been determined not to be legal. And later got whatever we sent in back.

Yes, that is exactly what went on here. I'm not sure why the setup didn't hold up in court, but it didn't. So now, the cameras are gone. They did a really good job for a few years right after Katrina, and people obeyed the speed limit signs. Now, speeding is out of control again.

[Which Roger]

If a cop writes me a ticket, I can go to court and challenge it. If the cop doesn't show up, the case gets thrown out. How do things work with a ticket from a camera?

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Which Roger If a cop writes me a ticket, I can go to court and challenge it. If the cop doesn't show up, the case gets thrown out. How do things work with a ticket from a camera?

I would imagine that a representative of LE would be there with the evidence. And if no representative shows up, it would be thrown out of court.

Is this really any different than a cop with a radar printout? Did the cop 'see' you speeding? Not really, he relies on the technology.

-ERD50

[tfudtuckerpucker]

Here's a funny story. Years ago my friend from Taiwan got a camera ticket. It showed his face clearly. He asked my advice, and I told him to just say it wasn't you, and make them prove it was. Indeed, I said smiling, they probably can't tell you apart anyway. He did that, and they dismissed the ticket.

[RetireAge50]

This is a joke right? Would anyone really want someone watching over their shoulder ALL the time?

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RetireAge50 This is a joke right? Would anyone really want someone watching over their shoulder ALL the time?

Is your comment a joke?

No one said we 'want someone watching over our shoulder ALL the time'. But if you are driving on a PUBLIC road, then yes, I think it would be a good idea to have everyone monitored while they are driving on a public road.

We now get monitored sometimes, almost randomly. Better to be consistent. Some people seem smooth enough (or cute enough) to talk themselves out of a ticket. The camera is more fair, IMO.

No joke.

-ERD50