7 ms·

Can anyone tell me why speeding tickets aren't enforced with video cameras (like red-light tickets are)? It would seem to be much more accurate, much easier to

Can anyone tell me why speeding tickets aren't enforced with video cameras (like red-light tickets are)? It would seem to be much more accurate, much easier to enforce, and much harder to dispute. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of speed limit laws, I do believe that consistent and efficient enforcement can only be a good thing.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
One word: Discretion "Confronting Automated Law Enforcement" http://robots.law.miami.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Shay-EtAl-ConfrontingAutomatedLawEnf.pdf http://robots.law.miami.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Shay-...
- Gracana 12y ago
  That's a pretty short summary of a 44 page document. Can you elaborate a little more?
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    Sure. Do you want to live in a world where every time you violate the letter of the law you're penalized? Before you answer, consider that you're going to have to keep 100-200 years of law hot in memory to ensure your daily compliance.
    - Gracana 12y ago
      Why bother asking a question when you word it in such a biased way? Obviously my answer is yes, that is the world I want to live in.
      - toomuchtodo 12y ago
        Because that's a terrifying world to live in. I am biased. To accept the idea of compliance with the law to the letter constantly is unreasonable. Roll 1-3 feet over the white stop line? Ticket. 1-2mph over the speed limit? Ticket.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
qeorge 12y ago
Speeding would require the police to record/archive video, vs. just a single photo which contains both your car being behind the white line and the red light. Also, the red light ticketing programs are often administered by private companies, without officers being involved. Speeding ticket video would need to recorded by the police. All that said, I think its a great idea and the obstacles can surely be worked out. Finally, a tip: if you are ever pulled over and you plan to dispute the arrest, request the officer's dashboard video ASAP. This will ensure it is preserved and available for you at trial; if you don't request it quickly enough it might not be available when you do. Don't count on it being around even a week - request it the very next day.
meritt 12y ago
Because video cameras are arguably illegal. You can't face your accuser in court, therefore it should be thrown out. Got a speeding ticket from one of these lovely cameras in the state of Iowa, then I was sent a bill from some company in Phoenix with bold threats that if I didn't pay the fine, it'd be submitted to a collection agency and negatively impact my credit score (because otherwise I'd just have not paid it. I'd happily live the rest of my life without ever entering Iowa where they could arrest me with a bench warrant) It's corrupt, illegal and immoral. However, since I (like most people, I'd wager) don't have the time nor energy to fight, I paid my $200 fine and moved on.
- valarauca1 12y ago
  Its just extortion, not even law enforcement. "We saw you do this, pay us $50 and it goes away. No insurance report, no evidence, nobody knows." Law enforcement does this all the time, so does the mob. Its not even worth it to fight it (economic speaking), the time you'll spend out of work, stressed, etc. Then if you get a lawyer involved. You'll end up spending >$300 in time and money to not spend $50.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  This is a common myth. The camera is not your accuser; the state is, using the camera as evidence of your violation. It would be no different than a security camera catching you breaking into a building. The camera doesn't sue, the owner of the building does.
  - bmelton 12y ago
    Moreover, I'd think it would be quite trivial to place the camera in the court room if any judge were to seriously consider that defense, while the camera furiously exerts its right to silence.
    - icelancer 12y ago
      Testimony from a witness that no longer presents information when questioned isn't a very good witness.
wmil 12y ago
The goal of speeding tickets is revenue generation not lowering speeds. It's essentially random taxation on people who drive quickly. Because of that they need mobile, disguisable, hand held units. Video from a handheld unit wouldn't be great for determining speed. Now, they could easily create combination LIDAR-Video boxes and mount them above traffic for clear speed calculations. But then people would learn where they are and drive slowly at that location so it wouldn't generate any revenue. In fact it might actually cause accidents because drivers might slam on the breaks when they get close.
- huhtenberg 12y ago
  > The goal of speeding tickets is revenue generation not lowering speeds. This depends on the country. In the US and Canada it certainly can be and is a cash grab, but in Switzerland, for example, it's not. Fines are in place, but they are also almost always accompanied by deterrent measures as well. Going 120 km/h through a tunnel where the limit is 80 km/h can earn you a week in prison sleepovers (that is you have to go to the prison for the night) with all earnings for that week withheld as a fine. Also, there's a lot of stationary speedguns, which you can spot at a distance. I also saw semi-portable automated speedgun that was placed in a specific spot where people tended to go over posted 60 km/h limit. It stayed in place for a week and then was removed, presumably after the average speed dropped to the limit.
- jonlucc 12y ago
  In Kansas City, Missouri, they installed a bunch of red light cameras and a bunch of false cameras (just boxes mounted on stoplights to look like cameras). The real ones and fake ones were published quickly (with whether they were real) and it had 2 major consequences. First, the traffic courts were quickly overwhelmed with challenges, and it became normal to wait 5-7 months before getting a court date for running a light. Second, several of the intersections with cameras saw a quick increase in accidents, as people were so terrified of a ticket that they would not worry about being rear-ended when stopping very abruptly.
dmoo 12y ago
In Ireland we have a system where you can contest any of these automated fines in court. The problem is that the fines and penalty points double should you contest and lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_points_in_Ireland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_points_in_Ireland
- kudu 12y ago
  How is that even legal? It seems like it would infringe on the requirement of due process anywhere in the world.
  - koenigdavidmj 12y ago
    That's just a more formalized version of a plea bargain. (Whether plea bargains are just as much a due process violation is not part of my post.)
- ascotan 12y ago
  In an effort to force people that can't afford to pay a double fine from seeking justice through the legal system? Nice.
- ksikka 12y ago
  It's funny that they make it like a game. Actually it's a lot like challenging a word in scrabble.
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  Alternately, you could change your name to Prawo Jazdy.
willyt 12y ago
I think that's how it works in the UK. When the lidar detector catches you speeding it fires off a camera that takes 2 photos of the vehicle a set time apart. The car's progress is manually compared against a gauge painted on the road surface to see if you travelled far enough in the time between the 2 photos to have been speeding. This catches those times when a lidar detector gives a false positive.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

toomuchtodo 12y ago

One word: Discretion "Confronting Automated Law Enforcement" http://robots.law.miami.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Shay-EtAl-ConfrontingAutomatedLawEnf.pdf http://robots.law.miami.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Shay-...

Gracana 12y ago
That's a pretty short summary of a 44 page document. Can you elaborate a little more?
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Sure. Do you want to live in a world where every time you violate the letter of the law you're penalized? Before you answer, consider that you're going to have to keep 100-200 years of law hot in memory to ensure your daily compliance.
  - Gracana 12y ago
    Why bother asking a question when you word it in such a biased way? Obviously my answer is yes, that is the world I want to live in.
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      Because that's a terrifying world to live in. I am biased. To accept the idea of compliance with the law to the letter constantly is unreasonable. Roll 1-3 feet over the white stop line? Ticket. 1-2mph over the speed limit? Ticket.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]

qeorge 12y ago

Speeding would require the police to record/archive video, vs. just a single photo which contains both your car being behind the white line and the red light. Also, the red light ticketing programs are often administered by private companies, without officers being involved. Speeding ticket video would need to recorded by the police. All that said, I think its a great idea and the obstacles can surely be worked out. Finally, a tip: if you are ever pulled over and you plan to dispute the arrest, request the officer's dashboard video ASAP. This will ensure it is preserved and available for you at trial; if you don't request it quickly enough it might not be available when you do. Don't count on it being around even a week - request it the very next day.

meritt 12y ago

Because video cameras are arguably illegal. You can't face your accuser in court, therefore it should be thrown out. Got a speeding ticket from one of these lovely cameras in the state of Iowa, then I was sent a bill from some company in Phoenix with bold threats that if I didn't pay the fine, it'd be submitted to a collection agency and negatively impact my credit score (because otherwise I'd just have not paid it. I'd happily live the rest of my life without ever entering Iowa where they could arrest me with a bench warrant) It's corrupt, illegal and immoral. However, since I (like most people, I'd wager) don't have the time nor energy to fight, I paid my $200 fine and moved on.

valarauca1 12y ago
Its just extortion, not even law enforcement. "We saw you do this, pay us $50 and it goes away. No insurance report, no evidence, nobody knows." Law enforcement does this all the time, so does the mob. Its not even worth it to fight it (economic speaking), the time you'll spend out of work, stressed, etc. Then if you get a lawyer involved. You'll end up spending >$300 in time and money to not spend $50.
Karunamon 12y ago
This is a common myth. The camera is not your accuser; the state is, using the camera as evidence of your violation. It would be no different than a security camera catching you breaking into a building. The camera doesn't sue, the owner of the building does.
- bmelton 12y ago
  Moreover, I'd think it would be quite trivial to place the camera in the court room if any judge were to seriously consider that defense, while the camera furiously exerts its right to silence.
  - icelancer 12y ago
    Testimony from a witness that no longer presents information when questioned isn't a very good witness.

wmil 12y ago

The goal of speeding tickets is revenue generation not lowering speeds. It's essentially random taxation on people who drive quickly. Because of that they need mobile, disguisable, hand held units. Video from a handheld unit wouldn't be great for determining speed. Now, they could easily create combination LIDAR-Video boxes and mount them above traffic for clear speed calculations. But then people would learn where they are and drive slowly at that location so it wouldn't generate any revenue. In fact it might actually cause accidents because drivers might slam on the breaks when they get close.

huhtenberg 12y ago
> The goal of speeding tickets is revenue generation not lowering speeds. This depends on the country. In the US and Canada it certainly can be and is a cash grab, but in Switzerland, for example, it's not. Fines are in place, but they are also almost always accompanied by deterrent measures as well. Going 120 km/h through a tunnel where the limit is 80 km/h can earn you a week in prison sleepovers (that is you have to go to the prison for the night) with all earnings for that week withheld as a fine. Also, there's a lot of stationary speedguns, which you can spot at a distance. I also saw semi-portable automated speedgun that was placed in a specific spot where people tended to go over posted 60 km/h limit. It stayed in place for a week and then was removed, presumably after the average speed dropped to the limit.
jonlucc 12y ago
In Kansas City, Missouri, they installed a bunch of red light cameras and a bunch of false cameras (just boxes mounted on stoplights to look like cameras). The real ones and fake ones were published quickly (with whether they were real) and it had 2 major consequences. First, the traffic courts were quickly overwhelmed with challenges, and it became normal to wait 5-7 months before getting a court date for running a light. Second, several of the intersections with cameras saw a quick increase in accidents, as people were so terrified of a ticket that they would not worry about being rear-ended when stopping very abruptly.

dmoo 12y ago

In Ireland we have a system where you can contest any of these automated fines in court. The problem is that the fines and penalty points double should you contest and lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_points_in_Ireland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_points_in_Ireland

kudu 12y ago
How is that even legal? It seems like it would infringe on the requirement of due process anywhere in the world.
- koenigdavidmj 12y ago
  That's just a more formalized version of a plea bargain. (Whether plea bargains are just as much a due process violation is not part of my post.)
ascotan 12y ago
In an effort to force people that can't afford to pay a double fine from seeking justice through the legal system? Nice.
ksikka 12y ago
It's funny that they make it like a game. Actually it's a lot like challenging a word in scrabble.
lotsofmangos 12y ago
Alternately, you could change your name to Prawo Jazdy.

willyt 12y ago

I think that's how it works in the UK. When the lidar detector catches you speeding it fires off a camera that takes 2 photos of the vehicle a set time apart. The car's progress is manually compared against a gauge painted on the road surface to see if you travelled far enough in the time between the 2 photos to have been speeding. This catches those times when a lidar detector gives a false positive.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]