Isn't anyone bothered by all of the new red light cameras? (New York: crime, inspector)

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by pdcnret

You are woefully misinformed. You apparently do not understand the difference between civil and criminal violations. And who the ticket is made out to makes all the difference in the world. Again, it may be different where you live, but in New York, the cameras are legal, made legal by legislation passed by the State.

How do I know this? More than three decades of police service has taught me the different between the violations and more importantly, who can enforce what laws.

Not wanting to continue being argumentative but what you seem to be missing possibly because of your police training is the fact that the cameras are run by a private non police company therefore even though the legislature gave authorization for the cameras there are legal rules that state only law enforcement officers can enforce the laws or prosecute for a violation. In the case of the red light camera , the camera is the complainant just how can a constitutional challenge be made to a camera , when was the last time a camera has given testimony and answered questions from the defendant in a case ? Due process guarantees our right to face our accuser, not some one that reviewed a photo. That right is valid in all 50 states.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by dman72

Apparently your sarcasm meter is broken.

What sarcasm ? I was just stating a fact and asking a question . Does he really think most Americans would not have a problem with the government putting a camera in everyones living room . Lets put it to a vote here on CD. And I will start it "HELL NO not in my home"

[amyla]

i cant tell you how many times i have been sitting at a red light on rt 110 in farmingdale/melville-my light turns green and someone comes flying through a second later-there is an accident by kohl/waldbaums every week-i wish they were on every light-

[daveoliva]

Originally Posted by Fighter 1

What sarcasm ? I was just stating a fact and asking a question . Does he really think most Americans would not have a problem with the government putting a camera in everyones living room . Lets put it to a vote here on CD. And I will start it "HELL NO not in my home"

Re - read the comment, you'll catch the tone this time around.

[BigMike50]

Do red light cameras violate motorists' privacy?

No. Driving is a regulated activity on public roads. By obtaining a license, a motorist agrees to abide by certain rules, such as to obey traffic signals. Neither the law nor common sense suggests drivers should not be observed on the road or have their violations documented. Red light camera systems can be designed to photograph only a vehicle's rear license plate, not vehicle occupants, although in some places the law requires a photograph of the driver.

Are special laws needed to allow localities to use red light cameras to cite violators?

Before cameras may be used, state or local laws must authorize enforcement agencies to cite red light violators by mail. The legislation makes the vehicle owner responsible for the ticket. In most cases, this involves establishing a presumption that the registered owner is the vehicle driver at the time of the offense and providing a mechanism for vehicle owners to inform authorities if someone else was driving.
Another option is to treat violations captured by red light cameras as the equivalent of parking tickets. If, as in New York, red light camera violations are treated like parking citations, the law can make registered vehicle owners responsible without regard to who was driving at the time of the offense.
Red light cameras currently are authorized in about half of US states.
The most intense study of red light and their effects were done here in Va. A 7 year study. If you have the time a very interesting read......

http://thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/201...otresponse.pdf

[daveoliva]

Anything can be made "legal". It means nothing. It's "legal" for the NSA to wiretap people without a warrant, it's "legal" for the FBI to kidnap citizens in the middle of the night and take them to another country to be tortured, it's "legal" for our government to hold a person indefinitely in a prison without charges or access to a lawyer. So you see, legal means nothing except the organized criminals who make the laws decided they want something to be legal.

[agw123]

Originally Posted by daveoliva

Anything can be made "legal". It means nothing. It's "legal" for the NSA to wiretap people without a warrant, it's "legal" for the FBI to kidnap citizens in the middle of the night and take them to another country to be tortured, it's "legal" for our government to hold a person indefinitely in a prison without charges or access to a lawyer. So you see, legal means nothing except the organized criminals who make the laws decided they want something to be legal.

Anything can be legal as long as the government gets a piece of it. i.e. Lottery, Alcohol, Horse Betting, Casinos.

[BigMike50]

We Need "Speed Cameras" On All Highways!

Like I said before with the speeding camera's suggested on all L.I. highways.

These nuisance cameras cause accidents.....read the studies. The red light cameras cause increase in low collision accidents...like I said before imagine going 80mph and stopping to avoid these things. I like some of the reply this time....I just change my route to avoid them, I stop short, I'm waiting for mine in the mail.

[pdcnret]

Originally Posted by Fighter 1

Not wanting to continue being argumentative but what you seem to be missing possibly because of your police training is the fact that the cameras are run by a private non police company therefore even though the legislature gave authorization for the cameras there are legal rules that state only law enforcement officers can enforce the laws or prosecute for a violation. In the case of the red light camera , the camera is the complainant just how can a constitutional challenge be made to a camera , when was the last time a camera has given testimony and answered questions from the defendant in a case ? Due process guarantees our right to face our accuser, not some one that reviewed a photo. That right is valid in all 50 states.

There's no "prosecution" because the violations are not criminal. And states and localities can empower anyone to initiate civil violations. That's how meter maids can write parking tickets, how building inspectors can issue summonses. They're not cops, yet they are enforcing law.

[agw123]

Originally Posted by pdcnret

There's no "prosecution" because the violations are not criminal. And states and localities can empower anyone to initiate civil violations. That's how meter maids can write parking tickets, how building inspectors can issue summonses. They're not cops, yet they are enforcing law.

Techincally most meter maids are "Peace Officers" so they can enforce laws.

Bldg inspectors are not peace officers.