I think speed cameras are a good idea but the amount of the fine should be based on income. The speeder who makes $200k isn’t going to blink at a $200 fine but someone making $15k will learn their lesson.
Mpls will give out parking tickets for “empty “ cars.
They will not do redlight camera tickets because they can’t prove who was driving.
Explain the reasoning when the car owner is ticketed?
You are committing an offense on a public road.
Highway work zone speed cameras are coming to Washington state starting July 1, 2024.
I hope that the speed sensors for those cameras work much better than the ones on the more typical automated signs showing your speed–such as this one:
There is one of these contraptions in a nearby town, and the other day it showed my speed as 188 mph. The speed limit is 45, and I was actually driving at ~49 mph.
On one side of the coin, if I can’t afford a speeding ticket I don’t speed.
On the other side, when do you call too much intrusion by the government.
Most of the public school zones in my area have plenty of LEO’s available, and a lot of times they are in school zones keeping an eye on drivers and giving out tickets if needed, but we also have plenty on the roads in general, watching for speeders… At any given time you can drive down main street in the next city over (where I lived 20+ years) and see 5+ LEO’s watching traffic… In my current city, they are just out in force driving around watching… Neither will bother you much if you are going 5-10 mph over and depending on the area except school zones or around where kids are where they will nail you in a heartbeat, and considering it is nothing but hill and curves here, you don’t see them before they see you…
Whether or not one believes automated speed enforcement/red light enforcement cameras improve public safety is really not the important point. (And for the record, I think these devices are nothing but a money grab, from people who can ill afford it.)
Regardless, the very idea of politicians at the state legislature level enacting laws to overrule the direct will of the people should be unacceptable, and frightening to all of us. If the voters in a particular municipality voted to ban photo-enforcement cameras in their jurisdiction, the state should respect that, not try to find an end-run against what the people want.
The same mentality exists here in Arizona (not with regard to photo enforcement, but with regard to overruling the will of the people). The state legislature here pushed through laws to make it harder for people to get propositions onto the ballot, and to let the state legislature overrule the direct will of the voters.
I live in a city which had photo enforcement for a number of years, and it was found to NOT improve public safety at all. It didn’t even make that much money for the city government, but it sure siphoned a lot of money–mainly from lower-income people–out of the state. Needless to say, when the people were finally able to get a proposition onto the ballot banning the devices, it passed by an overwhelming margin.
As I have said before, public safety can be used to justify any means of restrictions on normal activities. There comes a point when it must stop. There will be no end to the restrictions and penalties that some zealots would implement under the banner of saving lives if they are allowed to do it. Eat bugs and like it. Meat is harmful to the public. Cars are bad. Roads are bad. All it takes is one generation asleep at the switch or brain washed.
The very first “Andy Griffith Show” was on tv the other day, and this topic came up. Andy’s philosophy was the same, traffic fines should be adjusted for income. Andy of course is fictional.
But I still concur w/that idea if the fine is truly high enough to be a burden. A fine of $75 or less wouldn’t normally be a burden, can be quickly neutralized by skipping a single dine-at-a-restaurant event and cooking at home instead. Easy way for even a low-income family to shift the fine to the restaurant. Likewise, if only to help their small businesses, state politicos should keep their traffic fines under $75 for all but the most serious offenses imho. Do you think any of these politicos are listening? … lol …
Amendment 8: excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines, nor cruel or unusual punishment inflicted. Effective 1791 as part of the bill of rights.
Doesn’t say anything about income. But I’m sure there will be attempts by some to amend the constitution. Maybe traffic fines shall not exceed 10% of annual adjusted gross income. That oughta do it. Or unusual punishment shall not include shooting or bankruptcy due to court costs for defense of same.
Have at it but first read about that German guy in 1800 and his view of the future.
To whom do you refer?
Whoever thinks fines should be a big burden and according to means. Not me.
I mentioned this somewhere else before, but my wife got hit with one of these tickets in MD. I was pretty cranky about it and actually got in touch with…I forget whom. Perhaps the court in that jurisdiction. The person I spoke with was reasonably sympathetic to my skepticism. How often are these things calibrated, and who does that, I was wondering? The answer: the company that sells them the equipment calibrates them. So there’s no real way to challenge this, I asked. Answer: not really.
This is so unconstitutional, I think I said. (Not that I really know all that much about law, but this seems a lot like 5th and 6th amendment violation in some regard). You can’t be accused, tried, and convicted by a machine within a fraction of a second where the “conviction” will be upheld by the company making money from the machine.
Still annoys me, but I sent them the lousy $60 a it was just easier - cheap for a speeding ticket, but they keep it that was and don’t assign the infraction to a specific driver, as they can’t.
I know it seems like a good idea to many and for many reasons. But it’s really shady. And I’m not someone to be overly prone to paranoia about my “rights” or the “nanny state” and such. I absolutely don’t think that most/all actions of state in the name of the public good are either “money grabs” excuses to apply wanton restrictions.
Which German guy?
Karl but we are to avoid the subject but seems to be gaining followers after over 100 years. He expected to see world revolution as the oppressed rose up.
For your sake I was hoping that you wouldn’t say that. But I kind of thought that’s what you meant. “Karl” wasn’t even born until 1818, for one thing. So in 1800 “Karl” likely wasn’t even a gleam in anyone’s eyes. And what you said indicates only one thing clearly - that you don’t know sh ** about “Karl” and his “view” of his present, or his thoughts about where the future was headed from where he sat. Or even where he wanted it to go.
Tell me one thing that you know about what “Karl” actually wrote. I’m interested to know. What? An authoritarian state? Find it. Send me the citation - from Karl’s own writing.
Fine the speed demons into bankruptcy.
Haste makes waste in multiple ways.
When I made $200k per year any ticket, especially a $200 one, got my attention. I favor speed cameras. People speed in residential areas, especially when there are no speed control devices like speed humps or speed cameras. Last year there was an accident where two cars were traveling through an active work area on the Baltimore Beltway, and they were traveling at well over 100 mph. They flipped into the work area over concrete barriers and killed several workers. Unfortunately fines don’t always work but I doubt that these two people will drive again after they get out of jail.
I will amend your overall accurate statement to read as follows:
I doubt that these two people will drive again legally after they get out of jail.
While license revocation would work with folks like you and me, there are definitely people who choose to drive even after their DL has been revoked. Unfortunately, there isn’t any way that I know of to stop these people from illegal operation of a motor vehicle.