Speeding camera ticket

James331 said:
My understanding is the ticket goes to the driver not the car.
Click to expand...

In this case, it doesn't. It goes to the car, like a parking ticket. That's why they can't assess points against the driver, and why it isn't considered a moving violation.

Part of why the MO Supreme Court knocked down red light cameras was the "rat out provision" where the owner could get out of the fine by turning in the actual driver. The Court said that shifted the burden of proof to the accused.

http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...-5a0c-8fab-76a84079c291/55d378bc7d272.pdf.pdf
 
Here in New Mexico too many people alter their license plate so it can't be read in a photo. I asked a cop buddy if doing that makes him want to look in the car to see what they are trying to hide. He told me yeah, but most the time it is honest people that just want to hide their license plate. Very few arrest come from that.

And the state supreme court decided the cameras at the stop lights was some sort of constitutional violation.

Here in town someone decided that if the yellow light time was shortened then less people would run the red light. Instead, more people run the red light. Many times I have stopped at the red light and watch cars pass me to run the light. The current record I have seen is 6 cars pass me to run the light after I stopped.
 
Worth a read...

That Time I Turned a Routine Traffic Ticket into the Constitutional Trial of the Century

The city produced one witness, the police officer who had signed the affidavit. On direct examination, he explained how the traffic camera system works. A corporation in another state called American Traffic Solutions operates the camera system, chooses the photographs on which to predicate enforcement, recommends the Montgomery police department initiate an action against a vehicle’s owner, and is paid for its work.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting story.

American Traffic Solutions is the same company that cities in MO used for their red-light cameras:


https://www.atsol.com

I like the quote on their web site:

IL-Chicago.jpg


Think of the children!!!
 
Fight it.
Paying it will only encourage them to continue on the road to perdition
 
I had the same thing with a "company" vehicle and going through the easy pass lane on the Thruway. Our vehicle never leaves campus this was 70 miles away. Turns out they made an error reading the plate. What ticked me off is you are guilty until proven innocent and you have to do the work to request them review it.
 
The problem with the red light and speed cameras is that they're not owned or run by law enforcement. They are operated by companies who share revenue with the municipality and make a tidy profit in the process. Those companies have no right to enforce traffic laws. If you didn't get the ticket from a cop it is not valid. The municipalities and courts go along with it simply because it a source of revenue. They have been challenged in many states but I'm not privy to the outcome of those suits. IIRC, Ohio recently shot them down.
 
Matthew said:
Interesting story.

American Traffic Solutions is the same company that cities in MO used for their red-light cameras:


https://www.atsol.com

I like the quote on their web site:

IL-Chicago.jpg


Think of the children!!!
Click to expand...

Every scumb bag who has invoked "the children" well 99% of the time they are all after things, and the saftey of "the children" ain't on that list.
 
Got one for driving 65 through a 55 in Sioux City IA a couple years back. It was highly annoying, we had MO plates at the time and thought about contesting it because we weren't sure about reciprocity between the two states for a violation such as this since MO considers speeding to be a moving violation.
 
Norman said:
The problem with the red light and speed cameras is that they're not owned or run by law enforcement. They are operated by companies who share revenue with the municipality and make a tidy profit in the process. Those companies have no right to enforce traffic laws. If you didn't get the ticket from a cop it is not valid. The municipalities and courts go along with it simply because it a source of revenue. They have been challenged in many states but I'm not privy to the outcome of those suits. IIRC, Ohio recently shot them down.
Click to expand...

In Virginia and Texas (and probably a couple of other states) there are toll roads operated by private entities that get to keep the tolls (they may remit a portion to the state depending on the contract). In Virginia, they alos have the ability to issue fines to the vehicle owners it the toll is not paid (either on purpose or because there is no electronic indication of whether your toll tag has been successfully read). In some cases, the fines have amounted to thousands of dollars. This is enforceable per state code.

As for speed, red light, and now stop sign cameras, the District of Columbia has an extensive network of cameras that raises millions of dollars a year. Like hundreds of cameras. They are debating lowering the speed limits in some areas (which will, of course, increase the revenue). Since DC cannot impose a commuter tax on folks from Virginia and Maryland........
 
wsuffa said:
In Virginia and Texas (and probably a couple of other states) there are toll roads operated by private entities that get to keep the tolls (they may remit a portion to the state depending on the contract). In Virginia, they alos have the ability to issue fines to the vehicle owners it the toll is not paid (either on purpose or because there is no electronic indication of whether your toll tag has been successfully read). In some cases, the fines have amounted to thousands of dollars. This is enforceable per state code.

As for speed, red light, and now stop sign cameras, the District of Columbia has an extensive network of cameras that raises millions of dollars a year. Like hundreds of cameras. They are debating lowering the speed limits in some areas (which will, of course, increase the revenue). Since DC cannot impose a commuter tax on folks from Virginia and Maryland........
Click to expand...

Toll rods I could accept. Speed and red light cameras no. They are nothing more than revenue generators.
 
Norman said:
Toll rods I could accept. Speed and red light cameras no. They are nothing more than revenue generators.
Click to expand...
I can only accept toll roads that are privately funded. What they did here in Los Angeles on the 110 with FasTrack amounts to get another gift of public funds. The carpool lanes were given to FasTrack to install their equipment for the toll road, and the city gets a cut.

If a private entity wants to profit from roads, then they can build them. Throwing a new revenue stream on top of an already publically funded roadway so a private company can profit is damn near criminal imho.
 
ircphoenix said:
I can only accept toll roads that are privately funded. What they did here in Los Angeles on the 110 with FasTrack amounts to get another gift of public funds. The carpool lanes were given to FasTrack to install their equipment for the toll road, and the city gets a cut.

If a private entity wants to profit from roads, then they can build them. Throwing a new revenue stream on top of an already publically funded roadway so a private company can profit is damn near criminal imho.
Click to expand...
Here it was a PPP. The private company put up like 17% of the amount required as equity, the rest was either direct contribution from the State/Feds or it was government-guaranteed loans. And the State gave them the right of way.
 
I am generally against the over intrusive government monitoring of everything....however the red light cameras I don't have an issue with. I have to turn left onto a busy road with a traffic light. I will see on average a red light runner 1/2 of the time. I am not talking a little pink, it is full blown red, I can get a 2 second count in. One of these days they will kill somebody, I realize that evokes the save the children meme from above. It has gotten absolutely ridiculous with the sloppy driving you see anymore, I can only pay attention to so many morons at a time, they are clearly reproducing faster than the average POA user..... Summary is don't run the red light, you won't get the $^**$#& ticket.
 
Getonit said:
I am generally against the over intrusive government monitoring of everything....however the red light cameras I don't have an issue with. I have to turn left onto a busy road with a traffic light. I will see on average a red light runner 1/2 of the time. I am not talking a little pink, it is full blown red, I can get a 2 second count in. One of these days they will kill somebody, I realize that evokes the save the children meme from above. It has gotten absolutely ridiculous with the sloppy driving you see anymore, I can only pay attention to so many morons at a time, they are clearly reproducing faster than the average POA user..... Summary is don't run the red light, you won't get the $^**$#& ticket.
Click to expand...
One of the counties around here that uses red light cameras was caught short-timing the yellow light well below state requirements....
 
I know someone who got a red light camera ticket in a rental car where I was the passenger. He asked me a few months later if I remembered him running a red light in Waukegan, IL. No...

He was very unhappy that he didn't get a chance to contest it. Since it was a rental, the rental car company paid the ticket, then billed it and a surcharge to his company credit card.
 
Last edited:
I don't think automated enforcement should be allowed at all. Take this citation I got... sent to the wrong person but not only that it is referencing one point on a long drive taken close to a month earlier. Nobody is going to remember that with any clarity... so we don't know the circumstances. Given what I know about that location now, the speed clocked, and the limit I'd say there's a very high probability she was on an unfamiliar road and either because of traffic or some other reason(like maybe it was missing/unreadable) missed the sign that dropped the limit from 70 to 55 in this one little area on a busy 4+ lane interstate highway.

Was it a legit citation? Very well could have been.. could also have been totally invalid. I, the person charged and not there, have no way of knowing. The person driving is never going to remember this one little spot at that one little time a month earlier. We have no way of even determining for ourselves if it is in fact legitimate let alone mounting any defense other than the absolute fact I wasn't driving and they issued me the citation. Given that the private company that processes these things and the city issuing the citation have a profit motive(I believe the mayor in one of the articles I read cited how much revenue they generate as a reason for keeping them) that's a HUGGGE conflict of interest.

Another problem... and this is probably a bigger issue with the red light cameras is they don't take into account circumstances that a police officer would. Maybe someone has to run a red light to avoid an accident, maybe the light is malfunctioning and has been stuck on red for the last 5 minutes(I've had that happen), maybe there's an unexpectedly icy spot right there and you couldn't get stopped in time. Who knows, the point is a camera only knows is IF LIGHT = RED AND CAR CROSSES LINE THEN TAKE picture. Then a month later you get this narrow photo and you may not even remember the incident. A police officer on the scene might not issue a ticket in many situations, even if he did you'd have the event fresh in your mind and you'd be able to recall it later in your own defense. A camera takes all that away... and we know that they don't make the roads safer, more like the opposite. So the only purpose of these is to generate revenue and the way they are doing it isn't constitutional.
 
Getonit said:
I am generally against the over intrusive government monitoring of everything....however the red light cameras I don't have an issue with. I have to turn left onto a busy road with a traffic light. I will see on average a red light runner 1/2 of the time. I am not talking a little pink, it is full blown red, I can get a 2 second count in. One of these days they will kill somebody, I realize that evokes the save the children meme from above. It has gotten absolutely ridiculous with the sloppy driving you see anymore, I can only pay attention to so many morons at a time, they are clearly reproducing faster than the average POA user..... Summary is don't run the red light, you won't get the $^**$#& ticket.
Click to expand...
Some localities seem to have their own rules on red-lights. Where my daughter lives now, you better count to 2 before you go on green. Same thing in St Louis where my wife is from. Other places, not so much.
 
Speaking of "local rules" speed limits in the Chicago area are basically only suggestions. I've been through a number of construction zones up there with posted 45mph limits, signs saying "speed limit photo enforced" and everyone is bumper to bumper doing 60-70. I've seen it happening with marked police cars on the shoulders... they do nothing. As far as I can tell, IL doesn't do photo enforcement they just put up signs. Either that or nobody has yet invented a data storage device large enough to hold all the violators. Or maybe they're saving all their time/energy for the violators who would generate a huge fine?

I hate hate hate driving up there, it was a small part in my motivation to start flying.
 
JOhnH said:
Get one of these:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-red-light-camera-jammer-on-sale-20170313-story.html

It says it is for red light cameras, but it will work for all traffic cameras. Including toll booth cameras.
Click to expand...
I was wondering if it would work until I remembered that some photography flash can be triggered by another (such as the pop-up flash on many cameras). I suppose it depends on the shutter speed on the camera, if it is open long enough to catch both flashes, and those can both flash rather quickly.
 
Why is this 'lazy' law enforcement and what does it matter anyway? Parking meters flash when they expire, some even send wireless messages. My home security system does several things when it's triggered. Why should law enforcement be 'hard'? Should we eliminate all technology because a 'real person' isn't witnessing the crime? There are signs posted all over the place warning drivers of the speed or red light cameras. Seems like your real concern would be that someone is breaking the law in your vehicle. Pay the fine then take it up with them.
 
Does getting a camera ticket for speeding or running a red light (normally considered moving violations) raise your insurance premiums the way a piece of paper from a cop will? I understand that in many places that use the cameras, they do not issue points to the driver because they don't know who the driver is, so the owner is on record. Are insurance companies finding out about these camera tix?
 
MAKG1 said:
Dude, your wife was driving, and you're bent out of shape trying to pay the fine with the other owner of your joint checking account?

If you think she didn't do it, challenge it. But trying to get out of an obligation by a technicality is not good character. You -- or your wife -- have the moral obligation to pay the fine unless you think it didn't happen at all. And if that's the case, hiding your wife's identity is both useless and unethical.

The state has proof the speeding DID take place. And challenging that is confronting your accuser.
Click to expand...
Lost me at "moral obligation" - that's a personal value judgement; legal oblgation, sure, but morality? Nah, that's just noise. . .I don't see insulting the OP's character as valid, not when he has a rational, if opposing, take on it.

As I mentioned, the calibration of the devices can be off- not a lot of time and effort goes into maintaining the equipment at a high level - all the state has "proof" of is the camera was triggered. Maybe by his car, maybe by another (depending on placement and/or equipment model), maybe by speeding, or maybe by a faulty sensor. The burden, in time, money, and hassle, is on the registered owner to worry out. That, in my moral judgement, is lazy, indolent, money grubbing abuse by local gov't. I accept you may have a diffrent take on it, without being morally reprehensible.

These things aren't for law enforcement, they're automated tax collection devices. Sometimes located for safety, sure, but those occasions are outliers.
 
The safety aspect of speed sensors can be handled with those trailers on the side of the road that flash your speed (unless you are one of those drivers that like to see how fast you can go, knowing you aren't going to get a ticket.)

Taking a picture and sending a bill to someone that wasn't even there can't act as a deterrent, or add safety. The driver isn't aware anything happened. This isn't like seeing a cop on the side of the road and slowing down because of it.

Are people still getting tickets for flashing headlights to warn oncoming drivers about a speed trap ahead? Same kind of deal - either you want someone to slow down, or you want that revenue.
 
Digging through my FB page and credit card statements looking for some proof I wasn't there yielded no help but from looking at those things I now know precisely where I was. In my workshop at home and I didn't even leave my property that day. I probably didn't drive anything at all unless it was a 4 wheeler or the tractor.

My wife doesn't speed, she's never had a speeding ticket or any other ticket ever. Since she wasn't mailed a ticket that still stands. I actually have personal doubts as to whether this was legitimate speeding. I have personal certainty that it wasn't intentional if it happened at all.

They sent me a fine with my name on it, not my wife's name but mine. True, the fine would come out of the same bank account either way but my name is one on the violation and her's is not. I do not see how I could possibly have any moral obligation to pay, I see it as trying to find a way to avoid being swindled by a city that did not follow their moral obligation to follow the constitution.

Right now I'm debating whether or not to do a contest by mail or just ignore it. Probably could get it dismissed if I appeared but that's a lot of hassle... unless it's a VFR day but what are the odds of scheduling it and getting that lucky? At the very least I want to drag this out in some way so that they profit from it as little as possible if I end up having to pay.
 
cowman said:
Digging through my FB page and credit card statements looking for some proof I wasn't there yielded no help but from looking at those things I now know precisely where I was. In my workshop at home and I didn't even leave my property that day. I probably didn't drive anything at all unless it was a 4 wheeler or the tractor.

My wife doesn't speed, she's never had a speeding ticket or any other ticket ever. Since she wasn't mailed a ticket that still stands. I actually have personal doubts as to whether this was legitimate speeding. I have personal certainty that it wasn't intentional if it happened at all.

They sent me a fine with my name on it, not my wife's name but mine. True, the fine would come out of the same bank account either way but my name is one on the violation and her's is not. I do not see how I could possibly have any moral obligation to pay, I see it as trying to find a way to avoid being swindled by a city that did not follow their moral obligation to follow the constitution.

Right now I'm debating whether or not to do a contest by mail or just ignore it. Probably could get it dismissed if I appeared but that's a lot of hassle... unless it's a VFR day but what are the odds of scheduling it and getting that lucky? At the very least I want to drag this out in some way so that they profit from it as little as possible if I end up having to pay.
Click to expand...
I'd contest it by mail. Best case scenario is the ticket gets dismissed. Worse case is you waste someone's time.
 
Yep, this is Cedar Rapid's 3 million dollar annual revenue raising out-of-state fee. I drive that route regularly. They'll typically not ticket below 10 over, they say. Most traffic in the 55 zone, which is where the cameras on I-380 are, runs 60 or below except for people with Minnesota or Missouri plates who may run 70 in the left lane. All the locals know where the cameras are and very few get caught. I know personally one man who was sent a ticket on a car that looked like but was not his. He contested and beat it. Can't speak to other incidents.
 
People put a lot of energy into debating the legality of red light/speeding cameras.

I got hit with a red light ticket late at night in stop and roll traffic leaving a concert. It wasn't a safety issue but, technically I did enter the intersection after the light had turned red. I paid the fine. I was happy it wasn't a real ticket that would result in points on my license and increased insurance rates. To me, it's a slap on the wrist. I screwed up (slightly), I paid a small fine, I got on with my life. Instant justice?

People invest a lot of mental energy into armchair-internet-lawyering their way around the obvious. Screw up, pay the fine, move on.
 
cowman said:
So I'm a bit annoyed... I just received a citation in the mail for speeding in Cedar Rapids, IA.
Click to expand...

I know the two camera locations there.

Each site is prominently marked with signs that say speed limit is enforced by cameras. I just slow to 55 like almost everyone else when I approach the second of the two signs.

They don't give a ticket for just 1 mph over the limit. Maybe for 10+ over.

I've never heard of anyone I know trying to beat the ticket.

Most caught this way are from out of town.
 
Highway robbery has a long and storied history. One of the reasons I prefer flying is because of this nonsense. At least in the plane I don't feel like a deer during hunting season.
 
Matthew said:
Are people still getting tickets for flashing headlights to warn oncoming drivers about a speed trap ahead? Same kind of deal - either you want someone to slow down, or you want that revenue.
Click to expand...

At least one Federal judge has held flashing headlights at other drivers to warn of speed traps, to be protected "speech" under the First Amendment.
 
denverpilot said:
At least one Federal judge has held flashing headlights at other drivers to warn of speed traps, to be protected "speech" under the First Amendment.
Click to expand...

When "CB" radios were very popular, someone tried to make it illegal to give locations of police running radar on the radio. Some judge determine that using a radio is no more illegal than 2 people sitting together drinking coffee at the truck stop and talking about a cop running radar at a certain mile post.
 
cowman said:
Another problem... and this is probably a bigger issue with the red light cameras is they don't take into account circumstances that a police officer would. Maybe someone has to run a red light to avoid an accident, maybe the light is malfunctioning and has been stuck on red for the last 5 minutes(I've had that happen), maybe there's an unexpectedly icy spot right there and you couldn't get stopped in time. Who knows, the point is a camera only knows is IF LIGHT = RED AND CAR CROSSES LINE THEN TAKE picture. Then a month later you get this narrow photo and you may not even remember the incident. A police officer on the scene might not issue a ticket in many situations, even if he did you'd have the event fresh in your mind and you'd be able to recall it later in your own defense. A camera takes all that away... and we know that they don't make the roads safer, more like the opposite. So the only purpose of these is to generate revenue and the way they are doing it isn't constitutional.
Click to expand...

As a cop, I am against cameras as well. To further elaborate on your points in your post. As you said, I have discretion on whether to issue a ticket or not based on my observations and your explanation. But, further than that, WHY was the driver speeding? WHY did the driver run the red light? Was the driver drunk? High? Maybe the the driver's license is suspended or they have warrants? These are all things a cop will be able to find out, that a camera won't. So maybe a citation was issued by a red light camera, but the driver was drunk and crashed three blocks down the road.

But, a camera is cheaper to operate than a cop....
 
denverpilot said:
At least one Federal judge has held flashing headlights at other drivers to warn of speed traps, to be protected "speech" under the First Amendment.
Click to expand...

Interesting.

I always thought it could conceivably fall under "Obstructing an Officer in the performance of his duty" or your state's equivalent. It seems to have the elements of that.

But I can see the free speech argument as well. I think I prefer it, actually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top