speed cameras in Mont Co! (crime, subdivisions, taxes)

[alpha_1976]

Originally Posted by elias9193

[/b]

+1 I totally agree with you so I'm done with this thread as certain people cannot hold an intelligent debate in a civil manner.

Your original message didn't seem (intend) to start one.

[reiflame]

Six pages and no one brings up that the speed camera law completely does away with due process. You literally have no ability to plea not guilty to a speed camera ticket.

That, and speed limits are entirely arbitrary (there is no reason that 270/200/495 are 55 mph instead of 60 or 65). At least running a red light is an empirically dangerous action. Speeding is not.

[seethelight]

Originally Posted by reiflame

Six pages and no one brings up that the speed camera law completely does away with due process. You literally have no ability to plea not guilty to a speed camera ticket.

That, and speed limits are entirely arbitrary (there is no reason that 270/200/495 are 55 mph instead of 60 or 65). At least running a red light is an empirically dangerous action. Speeding is not.

Anyone is entitled to think anything they want about anything. Unlike religion, speeding has some facts associated with it. According to the National Highway Transportation Association, speeding contributed to 30% of all highway fatal crashes, at a cost to the good old USA of $40 billion per year. In 2004, speeding contributed to the deaths of almost 14,000 people.

Also, I don't think speed limits are arbitrary. Certainly there are engineers and safety experts that determine speed limits. In Colorado for instance, many highways have a speed limit of 75 and most drivers are doing close to ninety, which was kind of scary to me. Additionally, you can fight a speeding ticket by camera in court. The flaw in the speed camera tickets are that they go the owner of the car not the driver, which may or may not be the same person.

[TestEngr]

Originally Posted by seethelight

According to the National Highway Transportation Association, speeding contributed to 30% of all highway fatal crashes, at a cost to the good old USA of $40 billion per year. In 2004, speeding contributed to the deaths of almost 14,000 people....

Also, I don't think speed limits are arbitrary. ...

Are you sure speeding is meant here, and not the real truth which is driving inconsistently with the flow of traffic? And I believe that can mean many things. While it might mean speeding, it also might mean driving 30 mph on 495.

Many speed limits are centered not on meaningful numbers but what something about the area maybe meant many years ago, or upon a local districts need for revenue. And that later fact I think has more to do with it than anything.

I left DC area many years ago, but a few years ago I got a ticket in the mail on one of my many trips in that area. It shows me going around a bus on the photo which seemed reasonable when I did it. If I had to say, since DC area got taken over by huge contractors for the government that also coincidentally sell high tech equipment, that they can sell anything to that area governments and the local population in DC area suffers with tickets in the mail. Too many big name companies all selling anything and everything to the local and federal government in DC area, that is all there is to it.

[rsh56]

Radar (Rémi Gaillard) - YouTube

[reiflame]

Originally Posted by seethelight

Also, I don't think speed limits are arbitrary.

The fact that municipalities will change them without any research disproves your assumption.

Originally Posted by seethelight

Additionally, you can fight a speeding ticket by camera in court. The flaw in the speed camera tickets are that they go the owner of the car not the driver, which may or may not be the same person.

No, you really can't. You will be found guilty unless you can prove that someone else was driving the car, and they accept responsibility.

[prim8]

Originally Posted by reiflame

The fact that municipalities will change them without any research disproves your assumption.



No, you really can't. You will be found guilty unless you can prove that someone else was driving the car, and they accept responsibility.

There is a difference between can't fight and can't win.
If you bring evidence that the camera is flawed somehow or that you weren't really speeding you have a chance to win.

[EHCT]

Originally Posted by prim8

There is a difference between can't fight and can't win.
If you bring evidence that the camera is flawed somehow or that you weren't really speeding you have a chance to win.

It's not really a fight if you have no possibility of winning. The chances of proving that you were ticketed by a flawed camera is very slim. The only person that I'd ever heard of who was able to do it was some business owner who had over 40 tickets sent out on his company's trucks. With over 40 tickets issued to the trucks he owned, he had significant data available to prove that the cameras were less than accurate. The average person is not going to have that type of data available to prove the inaccuracy of a particular camera.

Which brings me to another reason why I don't particularly agree with the way that Maryland makes use of its speed cameras. The cameras are actually provided to the counties via a 3rd party. The company providing the cameras are then given a percentage of Maryland's speeding citation revenue. I would consider this to be a conflict of interest especially since the 3rd party is also responsible for the calibration and maintenance of the equipement. If you don't believe that some shady business can happen in this type of arrangement then you should google the article about the camera in Cheverly that clocked a man riding his bicycle at 57MPH!

I'm not trying to argue that speed cameras don't have safety value because when used correctly I believe that they do make our streets a little safer. However, I would just like to caution those who use the argument that obeying the speed limit automatically eliminates the possibility of ever getting caught by a speed camera.

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by reiflame

No, you really can't. You will be found guilty unless you can prove that someone else was driving the car, and they accept responsibility.

Well, pardon my ignorance, but aside from challenging the functionality of the camera what other defense would you provide? If a police officer tracks you on radar exceeding the speed limit, the only defense youc an offer is that the radar gun malfunctioned. I don't see why a speed camera deprives one of due process in a way that a police officer operating a radar gun does not.

The way I see it, the speed cameras are actually a fairer system. With police officers involved, there will always be an arbitrary element to the system: you could get pulled over for going 5 miles over the speed limit, or you could skate past the cop doing 15 mph over. You might get pulled over, but another car going the same speed (or faster) might not. Speed cameras remove these arbitrary elements and actually provide a fairer ticketing system.

And again, since they're only triggered once someone is going at least 12 mph over, I really don't see why people are up-in-arms about this. You have to *really* be speeding in order to be caught.

[reiflame]

Originally Posted by 14thandYou

Well, pardon my ignorance, but aside from challenging the functionality of the camera what other defense would you provide?

How about any situation where an officer would be free to use discretion, like going to the hospital?

Originally Posted by 14thandYou

And again, since they're only triggered once someone is going at least 12 mph over, I really don't see why people are up-in-arms about this. You have to *really* be speeding in order to be caught.

That is well and good on local roads with legitimate 35 mph speed limits; it's less OK on highways and major thoroughfares where the speed limits are artificially low.