# Cameras Snap Speeders, Spark Controversy



## MJS (Mar 30, 2011)

Link




> RIDGELAND, S.C.  As Interstate 95 sweeps past this small town along South Carolina's coastal plain, motorists encounter cameras that catch speeding cars, the only such devices on the open interstate for almost 2,000 miles from Canada to Miami.
> The cameras have nabbed thousands of motorists, won accolades from highway safety advocates, attracted heated opposition from state lawmakers and sparked a federal court challenge.
> 
> Ridgeland Mayor Gary Hodges said the cameras in his town about 20 miles north of the Georgia line do what they are designed to do: slow people down, reduce accidents and, most importantly, save lives.
> ...


 
Thoughts?


----------



## fyn5000 (Mar 30, 2011)

How long have the cameras been rolling?  Has there been any studies done to see if traffic accidents have been reduced in that area since the cameras were installed?

Fyn


----------



## MJS (Mar 30, 2011)

fyn5000 said:


> How long have the cameras been rolling? Has there been any studies done to see if traffic accidents have been reduced in that area since the cameras were installed?
> 
> Fyn


 
No idea.  But, going on this:

"From January to July of 2010, there were 55 crashes and four fatalities. From August through the end of last month, there were 38 crashes and no deaths. And since the cameras started operating until last month, there has been almost a 50 percent drop in the number of motorists driving 81 or more."

I'll take a guess and say that they've been in use from Aug, '10 to present.  Again, this is only a guess.  I could be wrong.  In any case, according to this, there has been a decrease in incidents.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Mar 31, 2011)

What is the argument?
Is someone arguing that speed cams are offensive?


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 31, 2011)

Over here in Blighty, county councils are starting to switch off the Speed Camera's in their regions for not only are they deeply unpopular but they have been proven to have no statistically significant impact on accident statistics in most areas.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 31, 2011)

Mixed opinion on this one.

On the one hand, there is no expectation of privacy in public.  So if your photo (or your car) is taken, too bad.

On the other, there is little doubt that this is nothing more than a way to raise money for various government agencies.

However, it raises the money in the form of a voluntary tax in the sense that if you don't want to pay the tax, don't speed.

But, citizens accused of crimes have the right to confront their accusers.  How does one question a camera in court?

If the camera was a cop behind a billboard with a radar gun, few would be arguing the validity of the ticket issued; so why does that change when it's a camera mounted on a pole with a radar attachment?

In the end, I have less trouble with this than I have with what is coming.

http://news.cnet.com/E-tracking,-coming-to-a-DMV-near-you/2010-1071_3-5980979.html



> No policy bans police from automatically sending out speeding tickets based on what the GPS data say.
> Read more: http://news.cnet.com/E-tracking,-coming-to-a-DMV-near-you/2010-1071_3-5980979.html#ixzz1IBH4N2Za
> ​



Don't think this isn't going to happen.

And that is something I'd argue against.  The roadside cameras, not so much.


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2011)

Bruno@MT said:


> What is the argument?
> Is someone arguing that speed cams are offensive?


 
Well, from the article:



> But lawmakers who want to unplug them argue the system is just a money-maker and amounts to unconstitutional selective law enforcement.


 
Of course, I'm sure alot has to do with rights being violated. 

And then this gem:



> "I just don't think it's right," said James Gain of Kissimmee, Fla., one of the lawsuit plaintiffs who got a ticket last year while driving between his home and Greensboro, N.C. "If you get a ticket you should be stopped by an officer, know you have been stopped and have an opportunity to state your case."


 
I'd love to hear Mr. Gains reason.


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Mixed opinion on this one.
> 
> On the one hand, there is no expectation of privacy in public. So if your photo (or your car) is taken, too bad.
> 
> ...


 
Nice post Bill.  Just to hit on the underlined parts...

1) Just taking a stab at this, but, wouldn't this be no different than if someone were caught on a store security camera shoplifting?  If theres physical evidence of the persons plate and car, just like evidence of someone putting merchandise under their coat, how could that be disputed? I'd imagine if it went to court, an officer would have to be present.

2) You're right...it shouldn't make any difference.  Its funny though, because people no doubt would complain about the officer using radar or laser, trying to make the claim that they weren't speeding...it must've been another car but the officer thought it was them. LOL.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 31, 2011)

MJS said:


> > "I just don't think it's right," said James Gain of Kissimmee, Fla., one  of the lawsuit plaintiffs who got a ticket last year while driving  between his home and Greensboro, N.C. "If you get a ticket you should be  stopped by an officer, know you have been stopped and have an  opportunity to state your case."
> 
> 
> 
> I'd love to hear Mr. Gains reason.



I doubt anyone but Ms. Gain would have a chance of _'stating their case'_ by the side of the road and not getting a ticket.  Just saying.  One of my younger sisters used to laugh about how easy it was to avoid getting a speeding ticket by crying.  And yes, once she was pulled over by a female cop.  And no, it didn't work that time.


----------



## Cryozombie (Mar 31, 2011)

I have less problems with this than I do with the Red Light cameras, however I would caveat that these need to be fair:

1, you should receive a court date, and it shouldn't come after the tickets: I know in Illinois at least, you get no court date for Red Light tickets, only a short period to dispute the ticket and the tickets are routinely sent AFTER that period has expired so you have no recourse by law.

2, The fines should not exceed what you would receive for being caught by a Live person.  Again, at least in Illinois, getting tagged by a RLC is almost twice as expensive as getting hit by a LEO, in order to pay for the cost of the equipment and the fees to the RLC companies.

3, They need to be calibrated correctly AND allow for a margin of error.  There was some controversy, again here in Illinois, over Speeding Cameras in Construction Zones hitting people up for HUGE fines for going 47 in a 45... which yes, is technically speeding, but everyone knows a little analog radial speedometer is NOT ANYWHWERE near as precise as digital radar, especially on some older cars where the increments are only marked out in 5's.

These also don't take into account the flow of traffic.  If I'm going 55 because thats the speed limit and every other driver is going 80... I might not get a ticket but are my odds of getting into an accident far greater because I am an obstruction?   I consider it the same as the expressways here that list a 55mph "Minimum Speed Limit":  Why do we never see lines of cars at a virtual standstill when these roads are parking lots getting ticket after ticket from Law Enforcement?  Because Common sense indicates that following that Speed Limit requirement is unsafe in those conditions.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 31, 2011)

several local guys with motorcycles have been purchasing a fun device that flips their license plates down with a touch of a button.. How much do you want to bet that those devices become extremely popular with motorists as well in the coming years.
My thoughts?? I think once again this is only going to effect the people who actually try to live within the law and make their lives more complicated... The guys who dont care before will say...
F You and your speed/red light cameras. If you are to lazy to catch me Ill cheat.. Ill flip my license plates down with a switch of a button, then switch them back up after I pass the cameras...


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 31, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> several local guys with motorcycles have been purchasing a fun device that flips their license plates down with a touch of a button.. How much do you want to bet that those devices become extremely popular with motorists as well in the coming years.
> My thoughts?? I think once again this is only going to effect the people who actually try to live within the law and make their lives more complicated... The guys who dont care before will say...
> F You and your speed/red light cameras. If you are to lazy to catch me Ill cheat.. Ill flip my license plates down with a switch of a button, then switch them back up after I pass the cameras...



Years ago, my group was tasked to catch a guy who was stealing from the soda mess - an honor system fridge filled with soda - you know, take a soda, leave a quarter.  Someone was taking quite a few sodas and leaving nothing.  Then whomever was doing it started leaving mocking notes behind in place of money.

So we set up a camera.  The guy was clever; he saw it.  He avoided it.  Once, the camera went off and recorded something; we developed the film (this was before digital) and got a great photo of his exposed backside as he mooned the camera.  He did this a couple of times.  I guess he thought it was pretty funny.

However, soon after that, there was another camera that he didn't know about.  Inside the fridge.  Pointed right at his face.  So we got a nice photo of both of his smiles.

Flip up the license plate.  Go head on...


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 31, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Years ago, my group was tasked to catch a guy who was stealing from the soda mess - an honor system fridge filled with soda - you know, take a soda, leave a quarter. Someone was taking quite a few sodas and leaving nothing. Then whomever was doing it started leaving mocking notes behind in place of money.
> 
> So we set up a camera. The guy was clever; he saw it. He avoided it. Once, the camera went off and recorded something; we developed the film (this was before digital) and got a great photo of his exposed backside as he mooned the camera. He did this a couple of times. I guess he thought it was pretty funny.
> 
> ...


 
still wont help... the motorcyclists use full helmets and no front plates,
you can also flip the front plate down as well, you can cover the serial number in the front window in a car, flip down the visor and cover your face... besides with the amount of traffic they have they are going to have to either man it to catch you, or be out of luck...
the red light cameras, if it doesnt get a clear picture of your face is easy to get off. I know of several people who have gotten off of multiple tickets because there was no clear view of the face, and for the court to fight to convict is to costly.
no these things are only going to effect people who try to live within the law, the peopel who dont are going to laugh and get past it, and of those very few will ever actually be caught for it. Its a mess, its disruptive, its abusive, and its unecessary in my view, we need to shrink the size of government, and we do not need to provide them with more funding.


----------



## Archangel M (Mar 31, 2011)

Easy..once you determine the frequency and timing you sit a live copper at the site and look for the car/bike with the fancy spinning plate.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 31, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Easy..once you determine the frequency and timing you sit a live copper at the site and look for the car/bike with the fancy spinning plate.


 
Easy? I dont necessarily know its easy. besides the time the plate is flipped down is relatively small... if a cop is there trying to catch someone flipping plates, I would imagine he could be there slowing speeders in the first place with much greater success simply by his presence... no sounds like a money grab only to me.. If it was about safety then park a cop in the area full time that has higher levels of accidents...
I am against this kind of crap 100% its to easy to abuse.
ever notice the stats on red light cameras versus the stats for non camera lights who increase the yellow light by short amounts? The increase in time of the yellow light does much more to decrease accidents then red lights. If it was about safety in any way shape or form you remove the cameras and increase the yellows... but its not so they wont, tis all about revenue...I would even call it an illegal tax, since it is specifically about generating revenue.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 31, 2011)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-vIdhIw41k&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6SrpsKU59w&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnCZfA7bONY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC0SX6-c7I8&NR=1

there are dozens more variations..
good luck with catching those, proving they use it, and finding them...
great use of taxpayers dollars... have a cop sitting at a camera trap trying to enforce a hidden tax collection scheme HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA


----------



## jks9199 (Mar 31, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I doubt anyone but Ms. Gain would have a chance of _'stating their case'_ by the side of the road and not getting a ticket.  Just saying.  One of my younger sisters used to laugh about how easy it was to avoid getting a speeding ticket by crying.  And yes, once she was pulled over by a female cop.  And no, it didn't work that time.


Tears don't work on me.  I had a friend in high school who got stopped about 7 times for speeding, and she cried her way out of every one but the last.  Me?  I got stopped, I got ticketed.  So tears don't work on me...  (I did almost call the mental health people for one driver; I was seriously starting to wonder if she was going to commit suicide over a speeding ticket.)

Speed cameras and red light cameras do have an impact.  Sometimes, it's not the impact you want...  At some intersections, t-bone crashes go down, while rear end collisions before the intersection go up as people slam on the brakes to avoid the camera.  And speed cameras can cause similar incidents -- or they work like speed bumps if advertised & known:  the drivers fly between 'em, then slow down for the camera.

As to the money-maker -- it depends.  The system my agency had for a while, especially with the person running it for a couple of years, wasn't.  (They weren't exactly dedicated to working hard.)  But, in Virginia, the set up requires an actual police officer to review the pictures/video and make a determination on the ticket.  DC has a system where the vendor reviews the pictures/video and issues the ticket -- and gets paid per ticket.  I've got a problem there...  I can't get an incentive to write tickets -- why does a vendor?

Privacy arguments are non-starters.  Tags are publicly observed, the actions are publicly observed, and you have no privacy rights in the government's access to the DMV files for something like this.

Confrontation arguments are more interesting -- but most states that use these systems do allow you to request a hearing on the ticket.  It's not always easy to do -- but you do get that right.  In fact, in Virginia, you can simply provide an affidavit that you weren't driving and have the ticket dismissed.  I know some other states require you to essentially rat out the person who was driving...  Also -- these violations are typically treated as civil violations against the car, like a parking ticket, not a specific accusation against the driver.


----------



## Archangel M (Mar 31, 2011)

Caught many people who though that they were getting away with breaking the law. Many get away with it, it's laways been a numbers game.

And then there are the people who moan about tax collection schemes who are the first wailing about why the cops never "did anything" to prevent their loved one from being killed in a MVA at an intersection. 

After you get covered in someones blood while you hold their head up to keep their airway open while the seconds seem like hours as EMS is responding you laugh a lot less about people arguing their right to do 80 MPH and blow through red lights unless a live cop can catch them.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 31, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Caught many people who though that they were getting away with breaking the law. Many get away with it, it's laways been a numbers game.
> 
> And then there are the people who moan about tax collection schemes who are the first wailing about why the cops never "did anything" to prevent their loved one from being killed in a MVA at an intersection.
> 
> After you get covered in someones blood while you hold their head up to keep their airway open while the seconds seem like hours as EMS is responding you laugh a lot less about people arguing their right to do 80 MPH and blow through red lights unless a live cop can catch them.


 
umm do you really think someone blowing through a red light at 80 miles an hour care if there is a speeding camera?

Give me a break, while I think police officers for the most part would like to prevent real crime, I think that the majority of them are stuck to janitorial and revenue generation duties. Not by choice but by mandate. I don't count on police for anything... my friends who are cops know this and we laugh about it often.

the facts are someone who is going 80 through a red light isnt going to care thats so extreme and abusive I doubt they care about much.
another fact extending the time of the yellow light is what prevents accidents, not red light cameras. Another fact, here in San Diego, in north San Diego county it was discovered last year that many yellow light times were actually reduced when the cameras were introduced... Now given the fact that it is known that increasing not reducing the time of the yellow light is safer and leads to less accidents, why do oyou think they did that? hrmmmmm lets think on that a bit huh?....

speed cameras.... now you tell me do you honestly think that they are trying to increase our safety by introducing them, or are they trying to line their pockets and replace lost revenue? Do you think that they are going to put them in the places where speeding is most prevelant and abused, or where they will get the most people going at least 1 mph into the zone they can ticket? I will bet money when they start laying these cameras out that they put them where they can get the most tickets... even if the speeds on average are only slightly over the speed limit. They are not going to put them on the stretches of highway that invite the worst speeders, because it wont make sense for them to target a small number of people.
It was pointed out above that this has not been proven to do anything for safety in Europe... I dont know if this is true, but I would think it probably is, and I doubt it will here either.

so once agian your example is ludacris. the guy doing 80 through a red light isnt what this is designed to stop or prevent... because it wont, and because its nowhere near the norm.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Mar 31, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> several local guys with motorcycles have been purchasing a fun device that flips their license plates down with a touch of a button.. How much do you want to bet that those devices become extremely popular with motorists as well in the coming years.
> My thoughts?? I think once again this is only going to effect the people who actually try to live within the law and make their lives more complicated... The guys who dont care before will say...
> F You and your speed/red light cameras. If you are to lazy to catch me Ill cheat.. Ill flip my license plates down with a switch of a button, then switch them back up after I pass the cameras...


I can see people getting a ticket just for that, and see cops checking for the device on routine stops.
Sean


----------



## Cryozombie (Mar 31, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> After you get covered in someones blood while you hold their head up to keep their airway open while the seconds seem like hours as EMS is responding you laugh a lot less about people arguing their right to do 80 MPH and blow through red lights unless a live cop can catch them.



Hold on there Partner... FWIW, I am not advocating that one can blow thru red lights as long as a cop didn't see it.  HOWEVER, I have seen the studies that indicate 

A) that MOST of the revenue generated (again, here in Illinois... I won't speak for elsewhere) is from Right Turn Lane facing cameras, and most of the Incidents are triggerd by LEGAL right turn on reds.  It has gotten so bad that many towns now mandate that an officer reveiw all film to determine if a violation actually occurred, however places like Chicago still do not do so, and it has become such a problem we have several lawmakers working to make it illegal to use them in Right Turn lanes at all, 

and

B) DOT studies that have indicated that accidents at intersections with the cameras actually INCREASE at those intersections after the cameras are installed, particularly in areas (again, like Chicago) where they "short time" the Yellow light to increase violations.  Conversely, the same studies indicate that the saftey at intersections in general can be increased by lengthening the timing of the yellow light by as little as 2 seconds.  However, instead of doing this they continue to install cameras, proving (to me at least) it is about Revenue and not safety.


----------



## MJS (Mar 31, 2011)

Cryozombie said:


> Hold on there Partner... FWIW, I am not advocating that one can blow thru red lights as long as a cop didn't see it. HOWEVER, I have seen the studies that indicate
> 
> A) that MOST of the revenue generated (again, here in Illinois... I won't speak for elsewhere) is from Right Turn Lane facing cameras, and most of the Incidents are triggerd by LEGAL right turn on reds. It has gotten so bad that many towns now mandate that an officer reveiw all film to determine if a violation actually occurred, however places like Chicago still do not do so, and it has become such a problem we have several lawmakers working to make it illegal to use them in Right Turn lanes at all,


 
Yeah, I can see how this can be an issue.  Camera thinks that you're making an illegal turn ie: running the light, when in reality, its a perfectly legal turn to begin with...providing its not specified that theres no turn on red.

and



> B) DOT studies that have indicated that accidents at intersections with the cameras actually INCREASE at those intersections after the cameras are installed, particularly in areas (again, like Chicago) where they "short time" the Yellow light to increase violations. Conversely, the same studies indicate that the saftey at intersections in general can be increased by lengthening the timing of the yellow light by as little as 2 seconds. However, instead of doing this they continue to install cameras, proving (to me at least) it is about Revenue and not safety.


 
And thats wrong IMO.  I can predict more accidents happening if thats the case.


----------

