U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Iowa
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2010, 08:59 AM
jds jds started this thread
 
162 posts, read 420,492 times
Reputation: 36

Advertisements

I was looking to get everyones thoughts on these....
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2010, 07:40 PM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
I find it hypocritical that the very people who use cameras to supposedly catch those doing wrong are now saying it is illegal to use cameras and record THEM doing wrong.

Are Cameras the New Guns?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 07:53 PM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
Does anyone else find it ironically hypocritical that the same people who spend thousands of dollars and untold amounts of time telling us that what we see caught by a camcorder when they are involved is not what we are seeing.

Then those same hypocrites tell us the camera doesnt lie when it is one of us under the lens !

If it wasnt so damn scary their hypocrisy would be hilarious , they are like out of control nazi's on a modern day witch hunt.
If you float your guilty , if you sink and drown you were innocent.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 07:36 AM
 
Location: Davenport, Iowa
413 posts, read 1,586,493 times
Reputation: 522
Red light cameras at every intersection are fine with me. Speed cameras don't bother me either, although putting them on the interstate, as they're doing on I-380, might be going a little bit too far. Don't break the law and you won't get caught.

The reason people hate these is because they think that cops at least give them a sporting chance to get away with stuff, whereas cameras are "unfair."
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2010, 07:44 AM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,292 posts, read 24,066,483 times
Reputation: 3901
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuadCityImages View Post
Red light cameras at every intersection are fine with me. Speed cameras don't bother me either, although putting them on the interstate, as they're doing on I-380, might be going a little bit too far. Don't break the law and you won't get caught.

The reason people hate these is because they think that cops at least give them a sporting chance to get away with stuff, whereas cameras are "unfair."
I don't know if they do this in Cedar Rapids, but in Council Bluffs IA they not only have these red-light cameras, but they have shortened the duration of the yellow light to less than 3 seconds. One of the cameras is less than 1/4 mile from the Interstate, and another is at an Interstate off-ramp. If you are anywhere near the intersection when the light turns yellow, it is impossible to either stop or get to the intersection before it turns red.

What the dolts can't see is that people from Omaha are simply refusing to go into Council Bluffs now - costing the city of Co Bluffs tens of thousands of dollars in tax revenue.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2010, 06:46 AM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
Think about it peeps !

Who is controlling these cameras ?
A government bureaucracy under the command of a political administration that has overspent to the point where it is now desperate for revenue of any type at any cost to prolong and justify its existance !

Are you honestly foolish enough to believe that the data produced by these cameras would not be manipulated by those who control them to bear false witness when it would be to their advantage to do so ?

Also bear in mind that using these cameras denies those accused of a crime the right to face their accusers in court , one of the basic fundamentals of our legal system.
If the picture indicates you are guilty you have to pay,, CASE CLOSED !

The spirit of hitlers gestapo is alive and well on our nations highway's and byway's.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-09-2010, 03:25 AM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
California: Appellate Decision Strikes Down Red Light Camera Evidence

Appellate courts in California are becoming increasingly upset at the conduct of cities and photo enforcement vendors. On May 21, a three-judge panel of the California Superior Court, Appellate Division, in Orange County tossed out a red light camera citation in the city of Santa Ana in a way that calls into question the legitimacy of the way red light camera trials are conducted statewide. Previously, a string of brief, unpublished decisions struck at illegal contracts, insufficient notice and other deficiencies. This time, however, the appellate division produced a ten-page ruling and certified it for publication, setting a precedent that applies to the county's three million residents.

"This appeal involves an issue far too often presented to this court, namely the admissibility of evidence and the statutory compliance with the procedures employed by several municipalities in this county in what have come to be known as 'photo enforcement' citations," the unanimous ruling stated.

At trial, attorney R. Allen Baylis objected to the admission of the red light camera photographs because the city had failed to lay a proper foundation for the evidence. The court agreed.

"The photographs contain hearsay evidence concerning the matters depicted in the photograph including the date, time and other information," the ruling summarized. "The person who entered that relevant information into the camera-computer system did not testify. The person who entered that information was not subject to being cross-examined on the underlying source of that information. The person or persons who maintain the system did not testify. No one with personal knowledge testified about how often the system is maintained. No one with personal knowledge testified about how often the date and time are verified or corrected. The custodian of records for the company that contracts with the city to maintain, monitor, store and disperse these photographs did not testify. The person with direct knowledge of the workings of the camera-computer system did not testify."

California: Appellate Decision Strikes Down Red Light Camera Evidence
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2010, 10:17 AM
 
1 posts, read 2,459 times
Reputation: 10
If the government was truly after safety and not revenue. they would post an officer were the cam are. As it is this is just for the money with them saying it is safety. If you were ticketed by on officer and that would go on your record. Three and you lost your license. Not the case with cam just collect your money and on your way. So no real safety
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2010, 03:52 AM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
Red-light cameras haven't improved safety, L.A. city controller says


Los Angeles’ much-debated red light camera program has bypassed some of the city’s most dangerous intersections, cost more than $2.5 million over the last two years and failed to adequately demonstrate an improvement in safety, according to an audit due to be released Wednesday by City Controller Wendy Greuel.


Red-light cameras haven't improved safety, L.A. city controller says | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2010, 04:13 AM
 
135 posts, read 360,360 times
Reputation: 106
US Supreme Court Upsets Speed Camera Industry


"Red light camera and speed camera manufacturers fear that last month's US Supreme Court ruling in the case Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts could create legal turmoil for the industry. The National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running issued a statement yesterday warning that the ruling has armed motorists with a greater ability to challenge the basis of automated traffic citations. Speed cameras, for example, depend heavily on legal faith in a certificate that claims to confirm the total reliability of a machine's speed reading. In the Melendez-Diaz case, the high court ruled that merely producing such a certificate in court is insufficient. Defendants have the right to cross-examine any individual who claims to have certified evidence."


Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion in Melendez-Diaz, a 5-4 case that dealt with a laboratory analysis of drug evidence. The defendant argued that he had a right to question the lab worker who signed a piece of paper that certified the substance he had been carrying was cocaine. The majority agreed that despite the possible hassle involved in confirming each fact at trial, it is essential to the integrity of the court system that questioning of the evidence be allowed.

"The 'certificates' are functionally identical to live, in-court testimony, doing precisely what a witness does on direct examination," Scalia wrote. "Respondent and the dissent may be right that there are other ways -- and in some cases better ways -- to challenge or verify the results of a forensic test. But the Constitution guarantees one way: confrontation. We do not have license to suspend the Confrontation Clause when a preferable trial strategy is available."

Scalia further argued that the ability to confront witnesses is essential to ensuring that the potential for bias or error in scientific testing is uncovered.

"Nor is it evident that what respondent calls 'neutral scientific testing' is as neutral or as reliable as respondent suggests," Scalia wrote. "Forensic evidence is not uniquely immune from the risk of manipulation.... And because forensic scientists often are driven in their work by a need to answer a particular question related to the issues of a particular case, they sometimes face pressure to sacrifice appropriate methodology for the sake of expediency. A forensic analyst responding to a request from a law enforcement official may feel pressure -- or have an incentive -- to alter the evidence in a manner favorable to the prosecution... the prospect of confrontation will deter fraudulent analysis in the first place."

These concerns are especially apt with respect to the photo enforcement industry. In April, for example, lawmakers in France began to raise questions after learning that the private, for-profit company that operates the speed cameras, Sagem, is solely responsible for calibrating the units and certifying their accuracy. The situation is the same in the US, where companies that are in most cases paid on a per-ticket basis, are solely responsible for determining the accuracy of their own machines.

Under the ruling, it becomes the burden of the state or local authority to ensure photo enforcement company employees show up to testify in court. Failure to testify would result in the evidence being excluded and a likely acquittal.


US Supreme Court Upsets Speed Camera Industry
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Iowa
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top