Local teens claim pranks on county's Speed Cams

[Dictator]

If there is nothing that CLEARLY states there is a spped camera in a certain location isn't that illegal, because a police officer running radar or laser has to be in plain sight on public property.

Did you use this defense when you went to court for the ticket?

[Larry]

The facts are simple unless there is a big ass flashing sign that states "Speed Camera Here" peoplpe are going to speed down that road. My problem with the whole thing is that you don't know exactly where they are at. If there is nothing that CLEARLY states there is a speed camera in a certain location isn't that illegal, because a police officer running radar or laser has to be in plain sight on public property.

Right. I distinctly remember the Constitution requiring that the government is prohibited from enforcing laws unless it's clearly marked exactly where they're actually enforcing them.

That's why drug officers are required to be accompanied by several people, 25 feet away from them, with signs stating "WARNING: Undercover narcotics officer dealing drugs ahead".

Fact: If it's a speed camera that gets you going 5 over the speed limit or more, something no police officer in their right mind would pull you over for, than YES it's a revenue generator, not a safety precaution.

Opinion. And untrue, at that.

Fact: I have been nailed by a speed camera going 6 MPH over the posted speed limit.

Then you were guilty of breaking the law, weren't you?

If there is nothing that CLEARLY states there is a spped camera in a certain location isn't that illegal, because a police officer running radar or laser has to be in plain sight on public property.

Wow. Guess if you spout the same BS twice in the same post, then it must be true.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

question then larry: if a law intention is promote public safety wouldn't it be in the best interest to use the most effective means of curtailing said behavior? or does it make more sense to use the means however flawed to generate the most revenue?

like i already stated earlier, why not have cameras that register speed and change the lights to red if an offender is speeding? why not actually create roads that are prohibitive of speeding? this doesn't change the behavior of the driver it just MAKES money.

[Dictator]

why not have cameras that register speed and change the lights to red if an offender is speeding? why not actually create roads that are prohibitive of speeding? this doesn't change the behavior of the driver it just MAKES money.

Why should law abiding citizens be inconveniced by a speeders actions?

And roads are designed to curtail speeding. They're called speed bumps. Just doesn't seem prudent to build speed bumps on roads with a 35mph speed limit does it?

[Larry]

question then larry: if a law intention is promote public safety wouldn't it be in the best interest to use the most effective means of curtailing said behavior?

:secret:They're doing it.

Know why they're using cameras? Because cops cost a boatload of money.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Whatever your stance is about these cameras, these kids are freakin geniuses

[ChocolateCitySkin]

:secret:They're doing it.

Know why they're using cameras? Because cops cost a boatload of money.

:secret:

i already told you timing the lights and setting them up so they change if you're speeding is far more effective.

[Larry]

:secret:

i already told you timing the lights and setting them up so they change if you're speeding is far more effective.

You say this because of your vast knowledge of places where this has actually been done?

[Reic]

:secret:

i already told you timing the lights and setting them up so they change if you're speeding is far more effective.

I hope you realize how many car accidents this would create

[Reic]

To keep on topic, speed cameras are like thoughts that just shouldn't be a post.

I have never been ticketed by a speed camera, and I will be the first to admit I speed every single day, but I am not going to if it puts another driver at risk. I have not been pulled over in 2 and a half years, and I will venture to say I will be pulled over for speeding again in the future, but I am still going to speed.

Most everyone speeds, hell I have passed cops that are going 5 over the speed limit, with me going 6 or 7 and they don't do anything. I have gone 70 in 55mph zones with cops right beside me going the same speed, given that was on interstate 264, and 55mph on any interstate is not going to be upheld by 97% of the drivers on that road.

If a speed camera catches me, so be it, I sped, I'll pay the fine, and move on, as people have said earlier in this thread, these cameras do not change people's driving habits.

[Touchdown Redskins]

I got to say, those kids are awesome. Honestly, it's almost a good thing that they're doing this because now the enforcers will understand the flaw in their system.

[Toe Jam]

Now I'm actually proud of my generation for once. Way to go!

:wavetowel:

[ChocolateCitySkin]

You say this because of your vast knowledge of places where this has actually been done?

i just referred to a street in washington where if you drive the speed limit you can go several miles without ever hitting a traffic light... (16th st) and on porter st if you speed a camera reports your speed and changes the light to red.

additionally, i have a masters in which i studied urban planning so yes i do consider myself to have an extensive knowledge of city planning.

if you want to learn how good planning can deter criminal behavior i suggest you read "Life and Death of an American City"

[Larry]

i just referred to a street in washington where if you drive the speed limit you can go several miles without ever hitting a traffic light... (16th st) and on porter st if you speed a camera reports your speed and changes the light to red.

additionally, i have a masters in which i studied urban planning so yes i do consider myself to have an extensive knowledge of city planning.

if you want to learn how good planning can deter criminal behavior i suggest you read "Life and Death of an American City"

My city has spent the last three years debating whether we can afford the money that it would cost to synchronize the traffic lights on the busiest street in town.

So, you've cited one place in all of DC where these plans of yours have been implemented. Please tell us how much these systems cost, compared to the cost of speed and red light cameras, (which, I believe, cost zero), and how effective they are.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

My city has spent the last three years debating whether we can afford the money that it would cost to synchronize the traffic lights on the busiest street in town.

So, you've cited one place in all of DC where these plans of yours have been implemented. Please tell us how much these systems cost, compared to the cost of speed and red light cameras, (which, I believe, cost zero), and how effective they are.

may i factor in gas saved from traffic moving efficiently? how about fewer headaches does that factor in? how about the fact that it actually works as a safety measure? how about the fact that speed cameras only function at a set spot so people typically slow down and speed up.

this is a losing argument for you -- speed cameras are ineffective at changing driving habits. therefore their only purpose is to generate revenue.

and btw i cited two variants that are far more successful.

[skinfan133]

My dad got a ticket from one of these things. I can't understand how those cameras are 'right'. I mean, there's obviously nothing in the law that they conflict with on a grand scale, but it seems highly un-American. speed cameras seem to be something a country like China or East Germany would have, not the US. if it were up to me the program would be scratched. not only that but you're mailed something and told that either you pay it through the mail (or even online with a credit card!) or you have to go to court, and its an amount of money that's not worth contesting. just seems wrong.

[HighOnHendrix]

If there is nothing that CLEARLY states there is a speed camera in a certain location isn't that illegal, because a police officer running radar or laser has to be in plain sight on public property.

Not true at all. I've seen cops hiding in the woods, on the side of the interstate with their lights off, rocking unmarked cars, etc. I used to know a Sheriff's deputy who ran radar from his mother-in-law's driveway; as long as he had her permission it was legal according to him. Back home in Ohio they just put their marked cars in a U-turn thingee, everyone sees them and slows down. Out here, the cops are ****ing devious! I have been ticket-free for three years, but I still flip them the bird when I see them stopped all crooked to give some gomer a ticket.

[HighOnHendrix]

My dad got a ticket from one of these things. I can't understand how those cameras are 'right'. I mean, there's obviously nothing in the law that they conflict with on a grand scale, but it seems highly un-American. speed cameras seem to be something a country like China or East Germany would have, not the US.

=

[Enzo]

So you'd rather the gov't SPEND millions of dollars redesigning roads so that people don't run red lights?

As far as having "more cops", well, people will still complain that speeding tickets are nothing more than "revune generation". Furthermore, the speed camera's allow police to actually police instead of go after speeders.

The problem with speed cameras & traffic light cameras is that they sometimes give a ticket to a person that doesn't commit the crime. Further more they are technically illegal because in this country you are innocent until proven guilty & regardly of whether it is your car or not that speeds or runs the red light the police have no proof who is actually driving the car (if they only get a picture of the license plate) & can't prove it one way or another. So, I incourage everybody that gets a ticket from a speed camera or traffic light camera to go to court & fight it. Make them prove in court without a reasonable doubt that you actually committed the crime.

[PokerPacker]

If this is what it takes to get the damn cameras outlawed, I'm all for it.

[Kosher Ham]

First of all, I do not consider "speeding" as a "criminal" offense.

Second, my wife received a ticket in the mail about 5 years ago from a speed camera...I was driving and taking her car for an oil change.

Third, (as someone else stated) perhaps I was moving out of the way of an emergency vehicle.

Fourth, I had a speeding ticket about 15 years ago or so, at the speed trap near Tysons...I went to court and there were cops that only took pictures of people to charge them with HOV violations...All of them simply said, "I had small kids that were sleeping in the back".

Fifth (Off-Topic, a little), I had a redlight ticket in DC about 7-8 years ago. I refused to pay it, they doubled it and such...next thing I know they send me a letter in the mail stating that the light was confusing and the ticket was dismissed.

[Titaw]

Did you use this defense when you went to court for the ticket?

Yes and I pled not guilty and SURPRISE the camera didn't show up in court and since the camera can't defend itself they dropped the fine. It's a pain in the ass to fight a $50 ticket because you have to miss work to go to court. That's why most people just pay the fine and forget about it.

[Titaw]

Right. I distinctly remember the Constitution requiring that the government is prohibited from enforcing laws unless it's clearly marked exactly where they're actually enforcing them.

So in your "EVERY single law must be followed by the letter down to the very punctuation rule" a police officer should pull over ANYONE going over the speed limit. That means the person that goes even 1 MPH over. Give me a break!

Opinion. And untrue, at that.

Actually if a police officer is not going to pull you over for going 5 MPH over the speed limit, then YES it is a revenue stream, nothing more. I know that a Police officer is not going to pull you over for going 5 MPH over the speed limit because I did it last night. You make yourself look more suspicious when you go the posted speed limit. Also, studies have shown that going under the speed limit is actually more of a danger than going over.

Then you were guilty of breaking the law, weren't you?

But isn't the government breaking the law with these cameras? There may have been a legitimate reason for someone to be going over the posted speed limit, but the camera convicts first and asks questions later. Now that person whom has the legitimate reason to speed has to lose a day's pay to go to court to fight a stupid camera.

BTW, just a little tidbit of information the company that makes and maintains the red light and speeding cameras gets a good portion of the fine (somewhere close to 50%). There isn't zero cost associated with the cameras either. 1) PURCHASE of the cameras. 2) Calibration of the cameras on a regular basis. 3) Mantainance of the cameras. 4) Replacement of worn out cameras. 5) Printing of the "ticket". There are others, now the only thing that I agree with you is that they cost less than officers, but we need more Police in this country not less.

[Burgold]

1) Amusing the number of people who believe that the world would be a better place if laws regarding speed limits and red lights went unenforced.

2) That said, I remember seeing, years ago, devices being sold as "radar jammers". These devices claimed that they would render police radar inoperative, or that, by setting two dials on the unit, would cause the unit to read whatever speed you set the dial for.

Wonder what the effect would be if someone with one of these devices were to find a speed camera in, say, a 35 zone, and place a radar jammer next to it that's been set so that every car reads as 55 MPH.

This is one where you are wrong... especially in practice. I drive along that road fairly frequently. The speed cameras make driving less safe.

Here's what happens. People are merrily driving along. About two hundred yards before the cameras everyone slams their brakes, decellerates 5-15 miles an hour (often to go below the posted speed limit) and for another three hundred yards go slowly, then they rev back up and continue to speed.

The cameras do nothing to enforce safe driving practices and if a stranger doesn't know about the cameras and can't anticipate the sudden braking, it could easily cause an accident. This is a revenue producer. If it were about safety, then drivers would get points, lose their licences, and have all the usual penalties for endangering or breaking the law. None of that is in play... you only receive a fine.

The cameras are 95% about the money.

[Kosher Ham]

I vote for no speed limits.