Author Topic: Red Light Camera Ticket  (Read 27119 times)

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #50 on: September 05, 2013, 08:13:43 PM »
On the other hand to all these "rolling right on red" arguments, I'd rather prefer that the asshole that is 4th in line turning left through a red get a ticket.

That depends though.  Turning left through a red could be legal as long as you are past the white line when the light is yellow (at least in Missouri).  At certain intersections, it's actually possible to be the 4th car waiting at a green light and be beyond the white line, so you are technically in the intersection. 
Though, admittedly, these intersections are few and far between.  Not to mention, the cameras are supposed to recognize this as legal.

Except it's not legal: you're not supposed to cross the white line to begin with unless you think you can immediately clear the intersection.

That said, when you've already sat through a complete cycle because the intersection is so congested that the stream of opposing traffic is constant, it's understandable to want to creep into the intersection in order to get through.

As TLV said, you're wrong.  I've actually heard in some places it's illegal to wait at a white line on a green light.

The bigger problem here might be that most people don't know their local laws, so they by default cannot fight them.

If you were at fault breaking the law, Mann up and pay the fee.
Strongly don't like the law? Fight to get it changed or move to where the laws are more to your liking.

Not sure if this is what you meant, but on one hand you say man up and pay the fee.  Then you say, fight the law if you don't like it.  Fighting it could include not paying the ticket ... so which one do you support.

Don't you think it's ridiculous that so many people say "it's illegal, take the penalty," instead of saying, "that law is utter bullshit and needs to be broken as a form of opposing it."

swiper

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 246
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Ottawa (Gatineau)
  • swiping ottawa
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #51 on: September 05, 2013, 08:35:58 PM »

If you were at fault breaking the law, Mann up and pay the fee.
Strongly don't like the law? Fight to get it changed or move to where the laws are more to your liking.

Not sure if this is what you meant, but on one hand you say man up and pay the fee.  Then you say, fight the law if you don't like it.  Fighting it could include not paying the ticket ... so which one do you support.

Don't you think it's ridiculous that so many people say "it's illegal, take the penalty," instead of saying, "that law is utter bullshit and needs to be broken as a form of opposing it."

By fight it, i mean get involved in the politics/system to get the law changed. Most of what i read in this thread sounds like dodging.

 

 

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4745
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #52 on: September 05, 2013, 09:03:11 PM »
As TLV said, you're wrong.  I've actually heard in some places it's illegal to wait at a white line on a green light.

You realize I was talking about permissive left turns with oncoming traffic, right? If it were illegal to wait at a white line in that situation as you claim, it means the law would be telling you to plow into somebody else's car.

wepner

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Age: 33
  • Location: Yokohama, Japan
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #53 on: September 06, 2013, 12:51:58 AM »
So we should follow laws and immediately pay for their consequences, even if they cause us harm?

Yep.  Otherwise why bother following any laws?  The bulk of them cause us harm by limiting our freedom to do things, yet we need to follow them anyways.

That's hyperbole.

Rosa Parks broke a "law". The point is, unconstitutional practices are not lawful.

Yes and she paid the consequences for it as well, that is why she is a hero. If she would have weaseled her way out of it (to be fair I believe she was arrested, so that might have been tough) then nobody would have cared.

Also, which part of the constitution in 1955 said you couldn't force black people to sit at the back of the bus? Or am I misunderstanding your point on this?

Dr.Vibrissae

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #54 on: September 06, 2013, 06:39:49 AM »
As TLV said, you're wrong.  I've actually heard in some places it's illegal to wait at a white line on a green light.

You realize I was talking about permissive left turns with oncoming traffic, right? If it were illegal to wait at a white line in that situation as you claim, it means the law would be telling you to plow into somebody else's car.

I was curious about this, as I've always pulled into the intersection to facilitate a turn, and am annoyed at busy intersections with no protected turn, when others don't do the same.  Best I could find in both the Texas Transportation code and the Texas driver handbook: you can turn left on green as (if permitted) but you must yield to oncoming traffic (and pedestrians).  No mention of the white line or the intersection at all.  So I will continue to pull into the intersection to turn. 

On a side note, the TTC also states it is  illegal to coast on a downgrade with the gears disengaged.  I wonder how much of a downgrade they mean? 

http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/dr-and-mr-and-jr

'I can't complain, but sometimes I still do/Life's been good to me so far.' Joe Walsh

grantmeaname

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4299
  • Age: 25
  • Location: London
  • This night has silence and very little fear
    • The MMM Blogger Community
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #55 on: September 06, 2013, 07:10:48 AM »
If you were at fault breaking the law, Mann up and pay the fee.

Strongly don't like the law? Fight to get it changed or move to where the laws are more to your liking.

Like America, where we have the supremacy clause. I'm moving there!

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4745
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #56 on: September 06, 2013, 10:03:54 AM »
As TLV said, you're wrong.  I've actually heard in some places it's illegal to wait at a white line on a green light.

You realize I was talking about permissive left turns with oncoming traffic, right? If it were illegal to wait at a white line in that situation as you claim, it means the law would be telling you to plow into somebody else's car.

I was curious about this, as I've always pulled into the intersection to facilitate a turn, and am annoyed at busy intersections with no protected turn, when others don't do the same.  Best I could find in both the Texas Transportation code and the Texas driver handbook: you can turn left on green as (if permitted) but you must yield to oncoming traffic (and pedestrians).  No mention of the white line or the intersection at all.  So I will continue to pull into the intersection to turn. 

Just keep in mind that if you get stuck in the intersection after the light turns red, you're obstructing traffic and therefore breaking the law. The sure-fire way of avoiding that situation is to not pull out to begin with until you are ready to turn.

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #57 on: September 06, 2013, 10:28:11 AM »
As TLV said, you're wrong.  I've actually heard in some places it's illegal to wait at a white line on a green light.

You realize I was talking about permissive left turns with oncoming traffic, right? If it were illegal to wait at a white line in that situation as you claim, it means the law would be telling you to plow into somebody else's car.

I was curious about this, as I've always pulled into the intersection to facilitate a turn, and am annoyed at busy intersections with no protected turn, when others don't do the same.  Best I could find in both the Texas Transportation code and the Texas driver handbook: you can turn left on green as (if permitted) but you must yield to oncoming traffic (and pedestrians).  No mention of the white line or the intersection at all.  So I will continue to pull into the intersection to turn. 

Just keep in mind that if you get stuck in the intersection after the light turns red, you're obstructing traffic and therefore breaking the law. The sure-fire way of avoiding that situation is to not pull out to begin with until you are ready to turn.

But that's only illegal IF the lane you are turning into will be extended into the intersection once you turn, thereby obstructing traffic.

Dr.Vibrissae

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #58 on: September 06, 2013, 01:35:58 PM »
Yes, you pull into the intersection, then complete the turn as you can, which may include as the light turns red (oncoming traffic should yeild, obviously you should be cognizant of cars not slowing down).  If you cannot clear the intersection in the lane you are turning into, then you should not pull out. 

However, defensive driving instruction here, teaches that you pull 1/4 the way into the intersection so that you are better able to complete your turn, and that you may complete the turn after/as the light turns, if you have pulled into the intersection.  This site has a nice explanation of the rules in Texas: http://texashighwayman.com/laws.shtml#WaitingIntersections
http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/dr-and-mr-and-jr

'I can't complain, but sometimes I still do/Life's been good to me so far.' Joe Walsh

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #59 on: September 09, 2013, 12:08:12 PM »
So we should follow laws and immediately pay for their consequences, even if they cause us harm?

Yep.  Otherwise why bother following any laws?  The bulk of them cause us harm by limiting our freedom to do things, yet we need to follow them anyways.

That's hyperbole.

Rosa Parks broke a "law". The point is, unconstitutional practices are not lawful.

Yes and she paid the consequences for it as well, that is why she is a hero. If she would have weaseled her way out of it (to be fair I believe she was arrested, so that might have been tough) then nobody would have cared.

Also, which part of the constitution in 1955 said you couldn't force black people to sit at the back of the bus? Or am I misunderstanding your point on this?

The 14th amendment prohibits any government from using segregation.

She was a hero, she didn't move and it sparked a change despite the city "law" of segregation which she was arrested for.

I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

Like the Rosa Parks case, people boycotted riding the bus..the city lost money... same goes here.. people need to stop paying those tickets and refuse on constitutional grounds.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3011
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #60 on: September 09, 2013, 12:52:55 PM »
So we should follow laws and immediately pay for their consequences, even if they cause us harm?

Yep.  Otherwise why bother following any laws?  The bulk of them cause us harm by limiting our freedom to do things, yet we need to follow them anyways.

That's hyperbole.

Rosa Parks broke a "law". The point is, unconstitutional practices are not lawful.

Yes and she paid the consequences for it as well, that is why she is a hero. If she would have weaseled her way out of it (to be fair I believe she was arrested, so that might have been tough) then nobody would have cared.

Also, which part of the constitution in 1955 said you couldn't force black people to sit at the back of the bus? Or am I misunderstanding your point on this?

The 14th amendment prohibits any government from using segregation.

She was a hero, she didn't move and it sparked a change despite the city "law" of segregation which she was arrested for.

I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

Like the Rosa Parks case, people boycotted riding the bus..the city lost money... same goes here.. people need to stop paying those tickets and refuse on constitutional grounds.

Speaking of the 14th amendment, it sure sounds to me like some districts using red light cameras do not follow this amendment (if money is considered "property"):

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #61 on: September 09, 2013, 01:13:06 PM »
Yes, you don't have to look too hard the find how these revenue generating devices are unconstitutional. They've been challenged in court many times and have lost...its just a matter of people taking them to task, one ticket at a time. Clog the system.

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #62 on: September 09, 2013, 02:10:48 PM »
I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

To me, it's even more ridiculous that I was notified of my court date a month after it took place.  I have evidence of this, but at this point, the only way to fight it (that I know of) is to go pay a lawyer to fight on my behalf, at which point I've paid far more for the lawyer than the ticket.

I haven't received any notifications in the mail for a few months though, and my credit report doesn't show anything related to it.

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #63 on: September 09, 2013, 02:26:36 PM »
I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

To me, it's even more ridiculous that I was notified of my court date a month after it took place.  I have evidence of this, but at this point, the only way to fight it (that I know of) is to go pay a lawyer to fight on my behalf, at which point I've paid far more for the lawyer than the ticket.

I haven't received any notifications in the mail for a few months though, and my credit report doesn't show anything related to it.

I say central services because I love the movie Brazil so much...but the bureaucracy sending that out a month after the fact isn't surprising.. it actually benefits them so they're indifferent. Central services is the one thing in which its own ineptness actually empowers it because they have a monopoly on the law.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3011
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #64 on: September 10, 2013, 08:11:06 AM »
I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

To me, it's even more ridiculous that I was notified of my court date a month after it took place.  I have evidence of this, but at this point, the only way to fight it (that I know of) is to go pay a lawyer to fight on my behalf, at which point I've paid far more for the lawyer than the ticket.

I haven't received any notifications in the mail for a few months though, and my credit report doesn't show anything related to it.

This. And I received a number of our tickets 8 months after the infraction, which left plenty of time for us to generate more tickets instead of correcting our behavior. Now, I slow down before the speed cameras and all of the tourists speed past me while honking. Really fun.

Will

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Location: Vancouver, WA
  • What the deuce?!?!?
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #65 on: September 10, 2013, 09:44:35 AM »
I'm not disputing the fact that running a red light is against the "law". What is unconstitutional is how you are charged and tried which denies us due process, etc, as I said a couple of times already. So arguing about what traffic laws are being broke is not the point.

To me, it's even more ridiculous that I was notified of my court date a month after it took place.  I have evidence of this, but at this point, the only way to fight it (that I know of) is to go pay a lawyer to fight on my behalf, at which point I've paid far more for the lawyer than the ticket.

I haven't received any notifications in the mail for a few months though, and my credit report doesn't show anything related to it.

This. And I received a number of our tickets 8 months after the infraction, which left plenty of time for us to generate more tickets instead of correcting our behavior. Now, I slow down before the speed cameras and all of the tourists speed past me while honking. Really fun.

Yeah, nothing unsafe about that at all!  ;)

Not that I am trying to promote illegal activity or anything, but an app that some of you might be interested in is called Trapster.  http://www.trapster.com/  Users submit speed traps, enforcement cameras, and road hazards, that then alert all Trapster users in the area. A high-tech version of flashing your headlights to alert drivers of potential road hazards.  I also think using a good radar detector (like the Valentine V1) to increase situational awareness is important too.  Like OldToyota says, you stay safe while others fly by and get the citations you avoided.
"Money often costs too much."  -Ralph Waldo Emerson
"My other vehicle is an IRA."

Want YNAB for $6 off? Use this:  http://ynab.refr.cc/89THXPM

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #66 on: September 10, 2013, 10:02:31 AM »
Remember, the people going faster than you are crazy bastards and the ones going slower are stupid idiots.

Who else misses Carlin?

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #67 on: September 12, 2013, 05:46:26 AM »
If you were indeed driving, I would pay the ticket.

I don't know how many jurisdictions are "scamming" people with photo-enforcement, for example by shortening the yellow light, but I bet it is fewer than people think. The MMM philosophy is to walk and bike for transportation as much as possible. Therefore, having a place where it is safe to walk and bike is key. Giving people tickets for when they break the law helps create a safe place for walking and biking. I know I feel much safer walking when people are in the habit of coming to a complete stop before turning on red.

+1

Watch the video and time the yellow light for yourself.  Then, look up your state codes on minimum yellow light timing and see if the light is timed correctly.  I think you'll find it is correct.

You gotta ask yourself - "do I feel lucky?"  about paying the ticket.  For me I wouldn't cry about getting caught and just pay the ticket.  It get's real complicated real fast when you start ignoring tickets.  The "system" works with hundreds of people like that (that don't pay) every day and knows how to get your attention.
I love being outside.

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #68 on: September 12, 2013, 06:41:04 AM »
If you were indeed driving, I would pay the ticket.

I don't know how many jurisdictions are "scamming" people with photo-enforcement, for example by shortening the yellow light, but I bet it is fewer than people think. The MMM philosophy is to walk and bike for transportation as much as possible. Therefore, having a place where it is safe to walk and bike is key. Giving people tickets for when they break the law helps create a safe place for walking and biking. I know I feel much safer walking when people are in the habit of coming to a complete stop before turning on red.

+1

Watch the video and time the yellow light for yourself.  Then, look up your state codes on minimum yellow light timing and see if the light is timed correctly.  I think you'll find it is correct.

You gotta ask yourself - "do I feel lucky?"  about paying the ticket.  For me I wouldn't cry about getting caught and just pay the ticket.  It get's real complicated real fast when you start ignoring tickets.  The "system" works with hundreds of people like that (that don't pay) every day and knows how to get your attention.

It's not a question of the yellow light being less than the state minimum.  It's a question of the yellow light being 3 seconds long on Tuesday and 2 seconds long on Wednesday, presuming both 2 and 3 seconds are longer than the state minimum.  The point is that the company that handles the lights has been CAUGHT multiple times changing the timing of yellow lights.

The second half of your post shows a clear ignorance of the situation in Missouri.  There are multiple pending cases challenging the red light cameras as a whole and I've already posted, in detail, the consequences and process of not paying.

Rollin

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
  • Location: West-Central Florida - USA
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #69 on: September 12, 2013, 02:04:54 PM »
If you were indeed driving, I would pay the ticket.

I don't know how many jurisdictions are "scamming" people with photo-enforcement, for example by shortening the yellow light, but I bet it is fewer than people think. The MMM philosophy is to walk and bike for transportation as much as possible. Therefore, having a place where it is safe to walk and bike is key. Giving people tickets for when they break the law helps create a safe place for walking and biking. I know I feel much safer walking when people are in the habit of coming to a complete stop before turning on red.

+1

Watch the video and time the yellow light for yourself.  Then, look up your state codes on minimum yellow light timing and see if the light is timed correctly.  I think you'll find it is correct.

You gotta ask yourself - "do I feel lucky?"  about paying the ticket.  For me I wouldn't cry about getting caught and just pay the ticket.  It get's real complicated real fast when you start ignoring tickets.  The "system" works with hundreds of people like that (that don't pay) every day and knows how to get your attention.

It's not a question of the yellow light being less than the state minimum.  It's a question of the yellow light being 3 seconds long on Tuesday and 2 seconds long on Wednesday, presuming both 2 and 3 seconds are longer than the state minimum.  The point is that the company that handles the lights has been CAUGHT multiple times changing the timing of yellow lights.

The second half of your post shows a clear ignorance of the situation in Missouri.  There are multiple pending cases challenging the red light cameras as a whole and I've already posted, in detail, the consequences and process of not paying.

There are better ways to change the law than to protest by ignoring the ticket.  My point is, once you get caught up in the system it can get very expensive and time consuming.  YMMV - so if you have the time and energy for that, go right ahead and continue.
I love being outside.

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #70 on: September 12, 2013, 02:07:03 PM »
If you were indeed driving, I would pay the ticket.

I don't know how many jurisdictions are "scamming" people with photo-enforcement, for example by shortening the yellow light, but I bet it is fewer than people think. The MMM philosophy is to walk and bike for transportation as much as possible. Therefore, having a place where it is safe to walk and bike is key. Giving people tickets for when they break the law helps create a safe place for walking and biking. I know I feel much safer walking when people are in the habit of coming to a complete stop before turning on red.

+1

Watch the video and time the yellow light for yourself.  Then, look up your state codes on minimum yellow light timing and see if the light is timed correctly.  I think you'll find it is correct.

You gotta ask yourself - "do I feel lucky?"  about paying the ticket.  For me I wouldn't cry about getting caught and just pay the ticket.  It get's real complicated real fast when you start ignoring tickets.  The "system" works with hundreds of people like that (that don't pay) every day and knows how to get your attention.

It's not a question of the yellow light being less than the state minimum.  It's a question of the yellow light being 3 seconds long on Tuesday and 2 seconds long on Wednesday, presuming both 2 and 3 seconds are longer than the state minimum.  The point is that the company that handles the lights has been CAUGHT multiple times changing the timing of yellow lights.

The second half of your post shows a clear ignorance of the situation in Missouri.  There are multiple pending cases challenging the red light cameras as a whole and I've already posted, in detail, the consequences and process of not paying.

There are better ways to change the law than to protest by ignoring the ticket.  My point is, once you get caught up in the system it can get very expensive and time consuming.  YMMV - so if you have the time and energy for that, go right ahead and continue.

And my point CONTINUES to be that you obviously haven't read my previous posts in this thread which have covered the EXACT thing you are talking about.

Crash87

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 165
  • Age: 30
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #71 on: October 06, 2013, 11:06:08 AM »
UPDATE:

St. Louis sent me a summons. I can either pay the $100 or go to court and have a judge tell me to pay $100. If I don't pay they turn me over to a collections agency.

I'm just going to pay. This fine is completely absurd, but I don't want to deal with a collections agency over $100.


Thanks for all the advice/input everyone
In general, pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes.

clutchy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #72 on: October 06, 2013, 11:19:36 AM »
I got a letter/ticket in the mail yesterday. The letter referred me to a website that has a video of my car (can't see the driver) making a rolling stop/right turn at a red light with no traffic. The letter says paying the ticket is an admission of guilt and that, if it wasn't me driving I need to provide the name/address of the driver.

I looked around on the internet and it seems that I may not have to pay since there is no proof I'm driving. I'm thinking I should send them a letter pleading not guilty and taking the 5th amendment so I don't have to give them someone else's name.

Anyone ever got one of these before and/or have any advice?

This is in no way legal advice.  I would ignore the fact that it even happened.  There is a case awaiting trial with the Missouri Supreme Court to determine whether these are even allowed in the state of Missouri.  Furthermore, the city of St. Louis has no authority to adversely affect your credit score or cause any other form of financial distress if you don't pay.  The only authority they have is to issue arrest warrants, which they have publicly stated they will not do.

On the ethics/morality aspect - You may have been the victim of an unethical setup.  The company behind the cameras also controls the light infrastructure.  It has been shown that they change the length of the yellow lights in order to catch more red-light violations.


I agree with this 100%.

We fought them and had them removed from 3 cities in our general area.  The tickets were like $470 a pop.

They're all gone now and everything is back to being decent.


They have legal issues with constructive receipt of said violation.  You know how you sign a cops ticket?  That's basically releasing yourself on your own recognizance.  there is no way for them to establish that you received the ticket.


I'll also point out that most of outfits are dubious.  They engage the city and say we'll put all this up and run it and then give you a % you have to do nothing and it will "fix" your budget.  IT IS poor governance for your city to do this and citizens should actively resist this.


Just remember; I live in a pretty decent sized city in southern california and we successfully had them removed from multiple cities.  Populations totalling close to 1/2 a million.  It can be done.

clutchy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #73 on: October 06, 2013, 11:20:18 AM »
UPDATE:

St. Louis sent me a summons. I can either pay the $100 or go to court and have a judge tell me to pay $100. If I don't pay they turn me over to a collections agency.

I'm just going to pay. This fine is completely absurd, but I don't want to deal with a collections agency over $100.


Thanks for all the advice/input everyone

wow that sucks.  They're a bit more aggressive over there aren't they?

clutchy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #74 on: October 06, 2013, 11:23:24 AM »
UPDATE:

St. Louis sent me a summons. I can either pay the $100 or go to court and have a judge tell me to pay $100. If I don't pay they turn me over to a collections agency.

I'm just going to pay. This fine is completely absurd, but I don't want to deal with a collections agency over $100.


Thanks for all the advice/input everyone

go to court; have them prove it was you.

when they ask you was it you?  Just plead the 5th.


You aren't required by law to incriminate yourself.

Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5759
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #75 on: October 07, 2013, 07:52:51 AM »
UPDATE:

St. Louis sent me a summons. I can either pay the $100 or go to court and have a judge tell me to pay $100. If I don't pay they turn me over to a collections agency.

I'm just going to pay. This fine is completely absurd, but I don't want to deal with a collections agency over $100.


Thanks for all the advice/input everyone

go to court; have them prove it was you.

when they ask you was it you?  Just plead the 5th.


You aren't required by law to incriminate yourself.

I think this advice will vary by state.  In Texas it isn't a moving violation.  They don't care who was in the car.  Your car ran the light.  It is like a parking ticket.  They don't care who parked the car.  It was parked.  The meter ran out.  Pay up.  (I'm not saying this is particularly fair... just how it is.)
Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2360
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #76 on: October 07, 2013, 01:40:29 PM »
Quote
The State of Maryland is the biggest user of these money-making schemes. They claim it makes the streets safer. It probably does, but the lights strategically placed at the bottom of steep hills and changing the speed from 50 to 35 in a short stretch (and then placing a camera there) certainly makes one wonder.

At night. In heavy rain and wind in the remnants of a tropic storm. At 4AM, obviously empty road. Not knowing the area. Driving a crap car (not mine) with foggy windows. God damn it. But they got me fair and square and I paid them their blood money.

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #77 on: October 08, 2013, 12:53:52 PM »
UPDATE:

St. Louis sent me a summons. I can either pay the $100 or go to court and have a judge tell me to pay $100. If I don't pay they turn me over to a collections agency.

I'm just going to pay. This fine is completely absurd, but I don't want to deal with a collections agency over $100.


Thanks for all the advice/input everyone

Just a collections agency? Or is that a threat of an arrest warrant in there anywhere?

If its just a collections agency, I would ignore and let them try.

stevesteve

  • Guest
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #78 on: October 08, 2013, 02:30:49 PM »
Wow, I expected a lot better from the MMM community on this issue.  What we get is a majority whining that it's unfair that they have to pay for breaking traffic law and then conniving to get out of their fines.   Then mpbaker cites a FHWA study that states there are modest economic benefits in the increase of rear-end vs. right-angle crashes from RLCs pretending it's an anti-RLC conclusion.  While stating that most crashes and even moreso fatal crashes are not RTOR, they disproportionately affect bikes and pedestrians.

I find it somewhat amusing that almost all times this happened the person who received the violation admits to the violation but still thinks they are right to fight not only their ticket but the enforcement system.  If the yellow light is too short then remove the system instead of making sure the light conforms to FHWA or state guidance.  We live in a country where there are more than 30,000 traffic fatalities a year.  It's not that right light cameras are the answer to traffic safety but they're one of the things the northern European countries have used in their safety campaigns.  AASHTO, FHWA, TRB synthesis, a recent publication in the Journal of Safety Research, etc. all show positive benefits of automated red light enforcement.  Attempting to deny this because it suits your narrative of victimhood is tantamount to climate denialism.

jfer_rose

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 422
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Urban Dweller
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #79 on: October 08, 2013, 02:52:14 PM »
Wow, I expected a lot better from the MMM community on this issue.  What we get is a majority whining that it's unfair that they have to pay for breaking traffic law and then conniving to get out of their fines.   Then mpbaker cites a FHWA study that states there are modest economic benefits in the increase of rear-end vs. right-angle crashes from RLCs pretending it's an anti-RLC conclusion.  While stating that most crashes and even moreso fatal crashes are not RTOR, they disproportionately affect bikes and pedestrians.

I find it somewhat amusing that almost all times this happened the person who received the violation admits to the violation but still thinks they are right to fight not only their ticket but the enforcement system.  If the yellow light is too short then remove the system instead of making sure the light conforms to FHWA or state guidance.  We live in a country where there are more than 30,000 traffic fatalities a year.  It's not that right light cameras are the answer to traffic safety but they're one of the things the northern European countries have used in their safety campaigns.  AASHTO, FHWA, TRB synthesis, a recent publication in the Journal of Safety Research, etc. all show positive benefits of automated red light enforcement.  Attempting to deny this because it suits your narrative of victimhood is tantamount to climate denialism.

Applause, applause, applause! I agree 100% and this is what I wish I had taken the time to research and say. Thank you.

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #80 on: October 08, 2013, 02:57:38 PM »
Sorry to disappoint you steve, I guess some people don't like being bullied by local governments and corporations teaming up to subvert the law of due process in order to generate revenue under the guise of "safety". I say good for them.

clutchy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 277
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #81 on: October 08, 2013, 04:40:35 PM »
Sorry to disappoint you steve, I guess some people don't like being bullied by local governments and corporations teaming up to subvert the law of due process in order to generate revenue under the guise of "safety". I say good for them.

this is a succinct distillation of the problem with Red light cameras.

that and they're fascist.

Crash87

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 165
  • Age: 30
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #82 on: October 08, 2013, 07:39:15 PM »
Sorry to disappoint you steve, I guess some people don't like being bullied by local governments and corporations teaming up to subvert the law of due process in order to generate revenue under the guise of "safety". I say good for them.

Agreed.

Tickets/fines issued without regard for common sense (in this case the fact that there is no other traffic is completely ignored) are no different than theft. However, if the worst thing that happens to me is occasionally having a hundred or so dollars stolen then I can't complain too much.
In general, pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes.

stevesteve

  • Guest
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #83 on: October 09, 2013, 08:30:53 AM »
Sorry to disappoint you steve, I guess some people don't like being bullied by local governments and corporations teaming up to subvert the law of due process in order to generate revenue under the guise of "safety". I say good for them.

this is a succinct distillation of the problem with Red light cameras.

that and they're fascist.

Mr.Macinstache, let me parse this.  You don't think the appeals process which is very similar to appealing a ticket given by an officer is acceptable due process.  You don't like corporations administering these programs.  That's simple, lobby to have public ownership and no revenue sharing.  You say it's under a "guise of safety" despite the fact that they increase safety and reduce more severe accidents writ large and that when coupled with good yellow and all-red light timings and good intersection selection (e.g. ones with more right angle crashes) they are incredibly valuable.  Why not lobby for better intersection selection and make sure light timings meet state standards (they mostly do)?  In the end I'm convinced that most people like you don't particularly care about traffic safety and are more interested in what you perceive as your right to violate traffic laws with impunity and want to reduce the chances of being fined.

Clutchy, maybe you use a different definition of fascism, hopefully one beyond "things I don't like", but you'll have to let me know what attributes of fascism these live up to.

Quote from: Robert O Paxton
1. The primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether universal or individual.
2. The belief that oneís group is a victim, a sentiment which justifies any action against the groupís enemies, internal as well as external.
3. Dread of the groupís decadence under the corrosive effect of individualistic and cosmopolitan liberalism.
4. Closer integration of the community within a brotherhood (fascio) whose unity and purity are forged by common conviction, if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary.
5. An enhanced sense of identity and belonging, in which the grandeur of the group reinforces individual self-esteem.
6. Authority of natural leaders (always male) throughout society, culminating
in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the groupís destiny.
7. The beauty of violence and of will, when they are devoted to the groupís success in a Darwinian struggle.
---Five Stages of Fascism

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #84 on: October 09, 2013, 08:53:48 AM »
Sorry to disappoint you steve, I guess some people don't like being bullied by local governments and corporations teaming up to subvert the law of due process in order to generate revenue under the guise of "safety". I say good for them.

this is a succinct distillation of the problem with Red light cameras.

that and they're fascist.

Mr.Macinstache, let me parse this.  You don't think the appeals process which is very similar to appealing a ticket given by an officer is acceptable due process.  You don't like corporations administering these programs.  That's simple, lobby to have public ownership and no revenue sharing.  You say it's under a "guise of safety" despite the fact that they increase safety and reduce more severe accidents writ large and that when coupled with good yellow and all-red light timings and good intersection selection (e.g. ones with more right angle crashes) they are incredibly valuable.  Why not lobby for better intersection selection and make sure light timings meet state standards (they mostly do)?  In the end I'm convinced that most people like you don't particularly care about traffic safety and are more interested in what you perceive as your right to violate traffic laws with impunity and want to reduce the chances of being fined.


There is no appeal - it's guilty to proven innocent!

Why the hell should I have to lobby for a different entity to steal from me? Theft is theft no matter who does it. Why didn't we just tell slaves to lobby their owners for different owners if they didn't like it?

And if you go through the thread again, you'll see examples where these Red light cameras correlate with increased accidents. The accusation that I don't care about traffic safety is absurd. That is one of the reasons I am against them. I can put you in touch with my city councilman who is a commercial airline pilot that led the fight to get rid of our red light camera because they were in fact a determent to public safety.






DoubleDown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1989
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #85 on: October 09, 2013, 12:12:50 PM »
Here's another element: EVEN IF the cameras were shown to improve public safety, should we be willing to trade our constitutional protections for it?

As an example, it would be much "safer" if everyone's houses were searched by the police every week for anything dangerous or illegal, or having police cameras in our homes, but of course we don't do that because it violates our rights of privacy and against unreasonable searches. This is a (somewhat) outrageous example, but hopefully it illustrates that "safety" is not the end-all justification for unconstitutional practices, such as assuming guilt and forcing a person to prove their innocence against a non-entity camera accuser. There's often a balance between safety and liberty, and one can't be argued to the exclusion of the other.
"Not all quotes on the internet are accurate" -- Abraham Lincoln

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #86 on: October 09, 2013, 12:22:41 PM »
Also, for those of you in favor of these Red light scameras, I am sure that you all NEVER drive a mile per hour over the speed limit, right? That is illegal! We should have speed sensors as well, every 100 yards to monitor your speed. And if you exceed the limit, even by 1 mph, you are breaking the law and should be sent a fine. Because speed kills! Correct?

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9475
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #87 on: October 10, 2013, 09:15:58 AM »
I wouldn't like the sensors . . . but if I broke the law, I'd pay the fine.  Otherwise you're just being dishonest.  Because of the fine, I'd be more careful about my speed.

If you run a red, you broke the law.  Just because you're used to getting away with it doesn't make it right.

shadowmoss

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 717
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #88 on: October 10, 2013, 09:22:16 AM »
For these reasons I'm a bit worried about the insurance placing driving monitors in a car to 'protect' against 'rate suckers'.  At this point it is seemingly voluntary if you want 'lower' rates by proving you are a good driver.  How long before that line gets blurred, though.  In order to even get insurance, you may need to have that.  Then, they will be in all cars and big brother will just come arrest you for what your car has reported to the gestapo... err, traffic court.

1984, we are there.
Bad spellers of the world UNTIE!

http://shadowmoss.blogspot.com/

Mr.Macinstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 923
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #89 on: October 10, 2013, 10:05:44 AM »
I wouldn't like the sensors . . . but if I broke the law, I'd pay the fine.  Otherwise you're just being dishonest.  Because of the fine, I'd be more careful about my speed.

If you run a red, you broke the law.  Just because you're used to getting away with it doesn't make it right.

That's what I'm saying with the sensors. The red light camera's are the camels nose. If you accept them, the sky's the limit. I could also the car insurance industry lobbying for the devices that catch you speeding etc. It's a win/win for them to increase your rates and increase revenue for the govt.

I don't think anyone is suggesting breaking laws. It's about the act of apprehension that protects our civil rights under the law.

Sort of like, police officers aren't above the law. They have procedures they have to abide by when searching your person, making arrests and so on.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3011
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #90 on: October 11, 2013, 09:48:29 PM »

As an example, it would be much "safer" if everyone's houses were searched by the police every week for anything dangerous or illegal, or having police cameras in our homes, but of course we don't do that because it violates our rights of privacy and against unreasonable searches. This is a (somewhat) outrageous example, but hopefully it illustrates that "safety" is not the end-all justification for unconstitutional practices, such as assuming guilt and forcing a person to prove their innocence against a non-entity camera accuser. There's often a balance between safety and liberty, and one can't be argued to the exclusion of the other.

Well, that is where we are in the US. It's "safer" to break into everyone's medical records/bank statements in the search for "terrorists." Instead of fighting the enemy that is against our Constitution and democracy, we've become the enemy.

And we do have cameras in our homes. They are on our computers and easily hacked into by the government if they so wish.

It sounds paranoid, doesn't it?

I was amused (horrified?) to see that thinking you're being surveilled has been removed from the list of "bizarre" thoughts by psychologists trying to diagnose psychosis. Apparently, it's no longer bizarre to think you are being surveilled...because you are!

*waving to nsa* Hello, NSA! Hope you are well! ;-)


oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3011
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #91 on: October 11, 2013, 09:57:39 PM »
I wouldn't like the sensors . . . but if I broke the law, I'd pay the fine.  Otherwise you're just being dishonest.  Because of the fine, I'd be more careful about my speed.

If you run a red, you broke the law.  Just because you're used to getting away with it doesn't make it right.

You are ignoring or not aware of the scams behind the tickets. In some cases--well documented--companies have given out unfair tickets. In one case, they fined a bicycled for going 60 or so mph. Come on. That's crazy.

In another case, a man kept getting tickets for a car he had reported stolen. The bills went to a collection agency and it took him hours of time to get it all straightened out...and then he'd get another ticket due to the guy who stole his car.

Plus, it's more surveillance. Yuck. DC now has cameras at every entry point to the city. If you drive in a vehicle, your plate is photographed and saved in a database. Why? These are creepy.

SnackDog

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
  • Location: Latin America
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #92 on: October 12, 2013, 03:11:38 AM »
Electronic monitoring of your driving and parking activity is here to stay and will only get more sophisticated over time. This is much more cost effective than policing with people, which wastes everyone's time.   This will be a huge upgrade to road safety.  I would like to see it coupled with a tripling or so of infringement penalties.  Red lights should be $1000 fine because running them causes so many deaths.  The US has among the highest road death rates per capita in the western world.  Sweden, with half the US rate (despite 9 months of ice all over the country), has over 1000 speed cameras.   Penalties are linked to income as well as speed - a couple years ago a billionaire was clocked doing 180 mph and was fined over a million dollars.
The habit of saving is itself an education; it fosters every virtue, teaches self-denial, cultivates the sense of order, trains to forethought, and so broadens the mind. ĖThomas T. Munger

Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5759
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #93 on: October 12, 2013, 07:47:18 AM »
Sweden, with half the US rate (despite 9 months of ice all over the country), has over 1000 speed cameras.   

I'm not sure that's really a one-to-one comparison.  Sweden is very small in comparison to the US.  Their highway system is less than 10% of the size of the US's.   There is a decent rail system (and it's easy to build a rail system with a smaller footprint).
Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight

SnackDog

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 997
  • Location: Latin America
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #94 on: October 12, 2013, 07:50:59 AM »
Miles driven per capita is comparable, but Swedish road conditions are typically worse.
The habit of saving is itself an education; it fosters every virtue, teaches self-denial, cultivates the sense of order, trains to forethought, and so broadens the mind. ĖThomas T. Munger

Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5759
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #95 on: October 12, 2013, 08:54:46 AM »
Miles driven per capita is comparable, but Swedish road conditions are typically worse.

I don't think it scales in a linear fashion.  For example, if there were 5 million traffic lights in Los Angeles (I'm making that number up) -- I don't think it compares to 2.5 million small towns with 2 lights each.

I also would argue the Swedish road conditions (based on having many Swedish friends that thought "oh these people are freaking out about a little ice and snow on the roads" ... then driving on it... and being scared shitless.   There is a difference (for example) between Swedish roads with snow tires and ice/snow removal and Texas roads with no snow tires, no snow removal and a layer of 1/2 of ice beneath the snow.
Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight

PKFFW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 301
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #96 on: October 12, 2013, 08:01:15 PM »
I must say it seems to me the cry of Constitutional rights infringement is a bit of smoke and mirrors to rationalise the desire to do what ever one likes in their car and not be held responsible unless caught in the act by a human Police Officer, which is very rare and unlikely to happen as there just are not enough Police to station one at every intersection.

But of course I could be wrong, so how about this?

Here in Australia we are responsible for our cars.  As such, if our car is photographed running a red light or speeding then we will receive a fine.  If we were not the person driving the car at the time we have the option of advising the authorities of who was the driver* and if we choose not to then we are responsible for paying the fine.

How would all the posters in this thread feel about that situation?

*Pleading the 5th would not be an option because by nominating the driver responsible you would not be incriminating yourself so it would not apply.

jba302

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 624
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #97 on: October 14, 2013, 11:28:08 AM »
Electronic monitoring of your driving and parking activity is here to stay and will only get more sophisticated over time. This is much more cost effective than policing with people, which wastes everyone's time.   This will be a huge upgrade to road safety.  I would like to see it coupled with a tripling or so of infringement penalties.  Red lights should be $1000 fine because running them causes so many deaths.  The US has among the highest road death rates per capita in the western world.  Sweden, with half the US rate (despite 9 months of ice all over the country), has over 1000 speed cameras.

Something suggesting these don't actually prevent accidents overall, which impacts my thought process on these quite a bit:
http://blog.esurance.com/are-red-light-cameras-actually-causing-accidents/


Quote
Penalties are linked to income as well as speed - a couple years ago a billionaire was clocked doing 180 mph and was fined over a million dollars.

This I like, progressive taxes are quite fair to me (though I'm also not rich and have an econ degree hah).
[/quote]

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #98 on: October 14, 2013, 12:05:39 PM »
Wow, I expected a lot better from the MMM community on this issue.  What we get is a majority whining that it's unfair that they have to pay for breaking traffic law and then conniving to get out of their fines.   Then mpbaker cites a FHWA study that states there are modest economic benefits in the increase of rear-end vs. right-angle crashes from RLCs pretending it's an anti-RLC conclusion.  While stating that most crashes and even moreso fatal crashes are not RTOR, they disproportionately affect bikes and pedestrians.

I find it somewhat amusing that almost all times this happened the person who received the violation admits to the violation but still thinks they are right to fight not only their ticket but the enforcement system.  If the yellow light is too short then remove the system instead of making sure the light conforms to FHWA or state guidance.  We live in a country where there are more than 30,000 traffic fatalities a year.  It's not that right light cameras are the answer to traffic safety but they're one of the things the northern European countries have used in their safety campaigns.  AASHTO, FHWA, TRB synthesis, a recent publication in the Journal of Safety Research, etc. all show positive benefits of automated red light enforcement.  Attempting to deny this because it suits your narrative of victimhood is tantamount to climate denialism.

How bout this for an argument?

Controlled studies show the average driver reaction time to a light turning green-> yellow is 2.3 seconds.  Missouri law states yellow lights need to be 3-6 seconds in length. At 45 mph, a car travels between 198 and 396 feet during the yellow light time window.  Missouri state law requires vehicles to have the capability of decelerating at 14.66 feet/second

Taking conservative measures, we'll go with 396 feet and 6 seconds.  Assuming the AVERAGE (remember, some people are naturally worse than average) reaction time, a driver who his braking will hit the brakes 2.3 seconds later, 244.2 feet from the line.  At the state required 14.66 feet/second^2 deceleration, the driver will take 4.5 seconds to stop, and will stop in 148 feet, a full 96.2 feet from the line.  That should be enough, except 6 seconds i the MAXIMUM yellow light time. 
3 seconds is the MINIMUM.  In cases where the minimum is used, a driver caught in the 198-396 foot zone will find himself a full 99.8 feet over the line, provided he has braked at a rate required by the state.

So, essentially, we have a red light camera system that has been set up to enforce vehicular requirements stronger than those of the state.  Missouri doesn't release the individual traffic light timings, so I can't provide hard data for a specific intersection, but it's certainly possible municipalities are enforcing a law NOT on the books.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2013, 12:15:23 PM by mpbaker22 »

mpbaker22

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket
« Reply #99 on: October 14, 2013, 12:16:57 PM »
I must say it seems to me the cry of Constitutional rights infringement is a bit of smoke and mirrors to rationalise the desire to do what ever one likes in their car and not be held responsible unless caught in the act by a human Police Officer, which is very rare and unlikely to happen as there just are not enough Police to station one at every intersection.

But of course I could be wrong, so how about this?

Here in Australia we are responsible for our cars.  As such, if our car is photographed running a red light or speeding then we will receive a fine.  If we were not the person driving the car at the time we have the option of advising the authorities of who was the driver* and if we choose not to then we are responsible for paying the fine.

How would all the posters in this thread feel about that situation?

*Pleading the 5th would not be an option because by nominating the driver responsible you would not be incriminating yourself so it would not apply.

It's more the selective enforcement of laws.  I sat at a light this morning and literally watched 7 cars in a row enter the intersection illegally, but they weren't running a red light, so they weren't issued tickets.  People fail to use turn signals all the time, but they aren't ticketed.