Red Light Cameras

[JL]

Originally Posted by astrohip

Can you show us a single documented case of this working? Thought not...


You are correct. It is a civil fine, not a criminal offense. Hence once can not be arrested for it. They *will* get the "no registration if you have outstanding tickets" law passed this next session, and that should increase collections from 70% to about 95%.

BTW, it is a civil offense because it is against the owner of the vehicle, not the driver. They have no idea who the driver is. If the owner swears an affidavit that someone else was driving, and names that person, they will remove the fine, and instead fine the driver. If that driver says it wasn't him, they have a criminal case against one or the other (perjury), and they will follow up on it. For this reason, you never see people pointing fingers unless it's legit. You really don't want a simple civil fine escalating into a criminal case.

It is interesting that you brought that up. A few months ago,my friend said the same thing when he told them that he was not driving. However, he never named the driver of his vehicle. He said he wasn't sure who was driving. I haven't talked to him lately, so i don't know what happened to his case.

[ZeroTX]

How would you necessarily know who was driving? What if you have roommates and frequently allow them to use your car? What if you went on vacation and left the keys and the car with your 6-member extended family and asked them to drive it occasionally to keep it running good? You would have no way to know WHO was driving at the moment when you weren't in control of the vehicle.

There are a zillion reasons why it doesn't make sense to ticket a CAR for an OFFENSE. Parking is one thing, because the car is simply in a place it shouldn't be with no driver present. So the only choice is ticket the car. When on the road, there's a person behind the wheel to ticket. Which police officers can do by pulling them over and citing them. A camera cannot.

I see this ultimately being challenged and the challenger making the win. This California communistic crap has to go.

[texas7]

Originally Posted by ZeroTX

How would you necessarily know who was driving? What if you have roommates and frequently allow them to use your car? What if you went on vacation and left the keys and the car with your 6-member extended family and asked them to drive it occasionally to keep it running good? You would have no way to know WHO was driving at the moment when you weren't in control of the vehicle.

There are a zillion reasons why it doesn't make sense to ticket a CAR for an OFFENSE. Parking is one thing, because the car is simply in a place it shouldn't be with no driver present. So the only choice is ticket the car. When on the road, there's a person behind the wheel to ticket. Which police officers can do by pulling them over and citing them. A camera cannot.

I see this ultimately being challenged and the challenger making the win. This California communistic crap has to go.

It's an owned car - so people should take some responsiblity for who drives it. People opt to let roomates/friends/extended family drive -- then when they get that ticket, they should be able to get whoever they loaned it to (if they are a true friend or family) to pay up. And, makes one think about who they loan the vehicle to particularly one that is registered and insured to them. Someone drunk drives your car and maims or worse, kills someone - that family can file suit on you as well as the driver because that car is registered to you and you are responsible for who you let drive it. So imagine if that loaned car runs a light and maims or kills - same thing.

[astrohip]

Originally Posted by ZeroTX

How would you necessarily know who was driving? What if you have roommates and frequently allow them to use your car? What if you went on vacation and left the keys and the car with your 6-member extended family and asked them to drive it occasionally to keep it running good? You would have no way to know WHO was driving at the moment when you weren't in control of the vehicle.

+1 what texas7 said. In addition, I believe case law says the owner is responsible for his/her vehicle, regardless of who was driving.

The bottom line is, you are driving for excuses (ha, pun!) to avoid responsibility.

Originally Posted by ZeroTX

I see this ultimately being challenged and the challenger making the win. This California communistic crap has to go.

Red light cameras have been challenged repeatedly in the courts, and have always been upheld. Sometimes there have been minor tweaks required, but the basic concept is 100% legal. For example, when Houston's RLCs were first installed, someone caught making a running right-on-red challenged it, and won, based on some quirky wording of the original RLC laws that didn't make it clear about right-on-reds. This was fixed with an amendment to the original ordinance, and now making a running right-on-red is just as much running a red light as going straight thru a red.

It is legal, and I suggest you stop running red lights. And if you don't, be thankful for laws like this that may help prevent a red light runner from T-boning you!