Yep, there were roads. You had to hitch your horse to the closet post, you couldn’t just “ground hitch” them in the middle of town.
Edit: “Roads” is a bit of a stretch…“Paths” I can go with…
The oldest road in the U.S. is Old Mine Road, built by the Dutch in the 1600’s to accomodate wagonloads of copper ore.
The Braddock Road. Being a military road it would have accommodated canon. It was the first improved road to cross the barrier of the successive ridgelines of the Appalachian Mountains.
MD 355 in what is now Rockville, MD; extended to the Port of Georgetown and used for trade so would have accommodated wagons.
These are just the ones I could find in 5 minutes. I fail to see what having to tie your horse up has to do with anything.
I’m pretty sure roads predate the Constitution, is my point. I seem to remember something about the Romans…
Yes whitey that’s exactly what i mean. If i was describing my actions, especially in light of trying to defend a right on red, i would say “i entered the intersection and took the immediate right” not that “i drove through the intersection” which to most people imho means you proceeded straight through to the other side. Clear enough?
One last example as i think this is getting a bit ridiculous- if someone gave you directions and said “when you come to this intersection, go through it” would you turn right?
You’re on your own, Whitey. I’m striving to be kinder, gentler.
Funny you guys would quibble over the meaning of “roads” rather than the legal issues. I guess we had roads in the same sense that the Romans did, although some Roman roads had paving stones. If you want to call them roads, I concede the point. It’s a tangential issue anyway.
No one was quibbling over the meaning of “roads”. Someone said, incorrectly, that there were “no roads”. Looking forward to further quibbling on the meaning of “through” though, thoroughly.
again, it depends on the state. in AZ, the photo letter is not officially a ticket on your record until they can prove you got it. if you don’t respond by mail, the agency behind the violation (local or otherwise) has 120 days from the violation to get it into your hands via a process server or whoever. after that, it’s voided. they make the letter very scary looking to get you to respond but i have a PO box on my registration so i have never had to pay these thieves. they aren’t going to pay a process server to stand around in the post office. based on your description of the incident, i would fight it through the mail if the letter came to your home address.
Regarding the comment made by mleich stating that the cameras are a “money grab by local governments”… that may be true, where I live we don’t require a city sticker (money grab???) so I’d rather have the red light violators pay the local government than me by purchasing a sticker. No one complains about buying a city sticker (mandatory) but they complain when they get ticketed for running a red light (optional).
Right!
My state doesn’t conduct safety inspections or perform emissions testing, which one could argue is nothing more than a money grab from a corrupt system. At least red light cameras, whether they are a money grab or not, have the potential to cut red light running, and in some circumstances, make the roads safer for the rest of us.
The jury is still out on whether red light cameras make roads safer. Some studies show they do, and some studies show they don’t. This suggest to me that intersections are unique, and blanket statements on either side of this issue are wrong. Red light camera effectiveness should be judged on a case-by-case basis, and the installation of red light cameras should NEVER coincide with a shortening of the yellow part of the light’s cycle. That is a clear indication of corruption.
Did you CROSS the STOP LINE before stopping preceding youRighturn on Red?
Before fighting it, learn if you violated any of the requirements.
Don’t fight if you have violated any technicalities and will lose. In addition to the fine, you will then be required to pay court costs, victims assistance, and if served, the cost of personal service .
(I won both of my cases, so they ate the personal service fees. (Since I was in telephone, mail and e-mail communication withe Photo Red Light Enforcement people, why did they have me personally served?))
To compel your appearance or payment of the fine.
Good point. At some point in the chain of events, we may be able to assume that the recording was “read” by a humanoid…from what OP has stated, it seems reasonable that a mistake was involved. Fight it if you can assume you were technically not a fault as Robt. alludes to.
Checkout www.highway robbery.com for good information about this topic. 19 out of 20 pay the fine. Many cities struggling to pay these private companies the “rental fee” they pay to install so they adjust timing of the yellow. This website offers help to innocent victims. We have reduced RED LIGHT violations by lengthening the yellow as most people do NOT I.
My wife got a photo ticket and of course didn’t know it it until I received a notice in the mail, as the car was registered in my name. On the notice there was a website to go to and actually see the photos. I asked my wife about it and she swore she came to a complete stop and we should fight it. I then showed her the video that also was taken by the camera which unfortunately showed she did not come to a complete stop. $100 dollar fine, most of which goes to the company that owns the camera system. Now if I can just figure out who the man sitting next to her is?
The fact that we haven’t heard back from the OP suggests to me he may be in the same boat as walk093’s wife.
Haha. They block outhe images of others in the vehicle.
Supposedly a woman in California opened a red light photo citation sent to her home and noticed a woman sitting nexto her husband.
They divorced.
Walt093, if they cannot identify the driver - if the driver is not the registered owner of the vehicle - then you can send a clear copy of your driver license signing a statementhat you are NOT the driver pictured.
You need not indentify the driver.
The citation must be dismissed.