[d4g4m]

6/8/11 A Broward Co. judge ruled that receiving a ticket for running a red light is unconstitutional because the current provisions of tickets/citiations for traffic light violations violates the 'equal protection' of the U.S. and FL constitution. He stated that you can't have two different penalties for the same offense. [ruling affects only his jurisdiction]
ticket issued by officer- $260 plus points on drivers license.
citation issued by camera- $158 civil penalty.
The State is appealing his ruling.
A similar case will be pending in Collier Co., a Naples case.
Administrators of both counties were questioned about the ruling. They stated that if given a choice of one or the other, they would pass an ordinance making a camera violation the law for their county.
Unknowingly, they have admitted that IT'S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. Cameras make more money than an officer issued violation.

[Occifer]

Of course they would rather have an ordinance. If violators are cited under the ordinance, the county gets all of the money and doesn't have to share any with the state. If the violators are cited under a state statute, half of the money from the citation automatically goes to the state. The reason that the state legislature enacted the red light camera section of the law is solely so the state could get revenue from tickets generated from cameras. Because of the way the law works, you shouldn't charge someone with an ordinance violation if a state statute exists for the same thing. So by enacting the state red light camera statute, the state has basically stopped enforcement of the local ordinances and ensured that they get a portion of the money from all the camera violations.

As far as the lawsuit goes, it has merit. That said, if this goes to the state Supreme Court (and I'm sure it will) and they rule in favor of the plaintiff, all that means is that the penalties for both violations will have to be the same. Don't think for a minute that they're going to go with the reduced penalty for both. You'll be getting the full fine amount PLUS points for a camera violation just like you would from an officer generated violation. It's not going to benefit anyone in any way, with the exception of parties to this lawsuit.

As to what they make more money off of, the comment that camera tickets generate more money than officer issued tickets is not correct. As long as the citation is written utilizing the state statute and not a local ordinance, the state gets half of any citation. The remainder is shared between the county clerk of the court, the county, and the city if the infraction occurred within incorporated city limits. With the old red light camera tickets issued based upon ordinances it was true that the county/city made more from them than from officer issued tickets, but that's not the case anymore since all are now issued based upon state statute.

[d4g4m]

It doesn't matter who gets or how the money is divided between city/county/state/camera company. A multiple amount a cameras will make way more money than any amount of officers on patrol. And if the camera is not making enough money, the camera company reduces the lights 'yellow' time. Even if you had an officer assigned specifically to one intersection for red light running, a camera would still make more money than the officer.
My point was that 'it's all about the money' and has nothing to do with the bureaucrats mantra of 'it's for your safety'.

[CDusr]

It's always about the money. That is what corporations do. Cameras are cheaper than an employee. Brings up questions to my mind.

Is a camera testifying or representing in court or in some capacity representing the govt? Is this automatic ticketing?
Does someone review the footage, do they go to court? I mean if traffic violations are ok what stops the next wave of camera's automatically fining you for anything they make a code or violation? What about malfunctions or personal judgment based on the light cycle?

Seat belts are another similar example, I never understood why school buses and public transportation weren't the first for seat belts. I think seat belts are a good idea, don't get me wrong. If you tell someone what they can do in their private car then seems the public funded options should be the first to comply. I also don't agree w/ red light running although I have noticed many fl lights seem to have far too short yellow light cycles. I think human judgment needs to come into play.

Pretty soon they can auto ticket you and auto debit you while someone is monitoring a screen. Next it will be no one at the monitor or keyboard.

[AkronAlan]

Not sure what you're getting at. The police can't monitor every intersection all the time...cameras can. The camera provides photographic evidence, better than unreliable eyewitnesses. Revenue from camera tickets can offset/lower taxes for the (law-abiding) citizens...it's a win-win for everyone (except those who think they're above the law).

[Coconut1]

Originally Posted by AkronAlan

Revenue from camera tickets can offset/lower taxes for the (law-abiding) citizens...it's a win-win for everyone

HA!!!!

I'll have whatever he's having

[CDusr]

YouTube - ‪family guy - kool aid‬‏

[AkronAlan]

Don't be afraid to get involved and contact your city/county/state officials and let them know how you feel; they work for us, after all. The government in this country is not "The Man, The Eye in the Sky, or Big Brother," it is our representatives. And they might be able to dispel some misconceptions you may have on various issues.

[CDusr]

Originally Posted by AkronAlan

Don't be afraid to get involved and contact your city/county/state officials and let them know how you feel;

Couldn't agree more.

[ferret111]

Originally Posted by AkronAlan

Not sure what you're getting at. The police can't monitor every intersection all the time...cameras can. The camera provides photographic evidence, better than unreliable eyewitnesses. Revenue from camera tickets can offset/lower taxes for the (law-abiding) citizens...it's a win-win for everyone (except those who think they're above the law).

Yeah, I'm sure the cameras will cause the tax rate to drop...

Dream on.