traffic cameras as enforcement

[javasaurus]

News item on WTOP today:

Apparently a lot of people are upset about red-light and speeding cameras. Personally, I don't see the problem -- don't run red lights, and don't speed, and you don't get fined. But people are making the claim that the cameras are overly invasive, somehow invading privacy. What privacy? You're on a public road, in a situation where if a cop was there, he wouldn't be invading your privacy by pulling you over, right? So why is the camera more invasive than a cop?

What really got me was the woman they interviewed who said (I paraphrase): There are some laws where if they don't catch you, it shouldn't be illegal.
Well, lady, you were caught.

Sigh...

I know there are issues regarding who gets the money from the fines, and some other issues regarding administration of the cameras. But I just don't get why people feel they have the right to break certain laws.

Comments

[faireraven.livejournal.com]

My biggest problem with red-light cameras is the fact that they don't know who's driving... Okay, so the car belongs to you. If your spouse is the one who was driving it, then the only way to get them to not give YOU the ticket is to rat on your spouse... Which technically speaking, you're not supposed to be able to be forced to testify against your spouse. Therefore, if you don't rat out your spouse, they'll give you the ticket anyway.

Hello? Problem?

Plus, if it's an automatic camera, who's to say the camera isn't malfunctioning? I've seen intersections where the red-light camera is blinking constantly, like it's taking pictures of every person's license plate... How do you prove that yours was the car that wasn't running the light?

It's very difficult to face your accuser, when your accuser is a piece of machinery that may or may not be malfunctioning.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

its a workaround the 5th amendment, entrapping you into a catch-22. either you basically confess (violating your 5th ammendment rights) and pony up the cash (and that's all they get out of it, as cameras currently don't actually affect your license or points), or rat out on the one who was driving (and if its your spouse, that's also a 5th ammendment violation of spousal privilage) lest you face obstruction charges.

there's also the issue of the incentive, as proven in a recent San Diego case, where the company who makes the cameras get a share of the money for each breaker they catch -- thus giving them incentive to reprogram the yellows to short-time in order to catch more when breaking for the red would be even more unsafe...

there's also the "flow of traffic" issues when it comes to the speed cameras. if i went 25 because i was worried about a camera, yet everybody else was just going forward at 35, then i would be causing a traffic obstruction (which in the UK is grounds for a ticket, regardless of the flow of traffics speed). however, if the flow of traffic was going 35 in a 25 zone, and i was just keeping with the flow of traffic, should they catch ALL of us? 100s in a day, raking in millions of dollars in a month, simply because the speed limit is too damn low for a particular road and all of us decided not to piss off the other drivers around us by driving too slow? where's the justice? where's the "safety"?

(oddly enough, in some areas, the speed limit is set not for "safety" but for noise control. In particular, Sterling Blvd is 35 for most of its stretch, even through stretches that have service roads so there are no pedestrians on the main road, simply because they *think* it might get too loud if the speed limit was a more reasonable 45.)

then there's the whole big-brother issue when homeland security decides they want to tap into those cameras records to "catch terrorists". we'd be better off if there were no records to tap into in the first place. really, we would. that's the "privacy" factor. enough cameras and they can track a single person ANYWHERE...yeah, useful if trying to catch the serial sniper, but it can also lead to information that can be wrongly used against people in stalking cases, wrongful terrorism-connection charges, and much more that i'd rather not dream of right now...