Exactly. It takes more work to type in a way that’s unintelligible, than to just be conscientious of what in the hell that you’re doing. Sheesh.
That strikes me as a feature, not a bug. And it is much of what I meant by saying cameras are more efficient for the task. You can’t cross-examine a bank security camera either, but that doesn’t mean bank robbers have lost their rights.
I don’t doubt that it is easier to get an acquittal with a human officer. It is hard to argue with the machine print out saying “on the 18th of last month, a red Toyota with license plate XYZ 448 went thru the red light on the corner of 11th and Main without pausing. Plate XYZ 448 is registered to Joe Smith, 123 Elm Street.” when the pictures of the car are attached to the print out.
Being photographed in public is a lot more common than it used to be, no doubt about that, but this has little to do (IMO) with an approaching police state.
Regards,
Shodan
Some advice for the OP:
- Don’t run red lights
- Don’t buy enough cold meds to start a meth lab
You’ll be fine.
Take a deep breath.
You’ll feel a lot better once you get an implantable chip so your vital signs can be monitored by smartphone app and your medical records instantly accessible on every ER visit.
hey Sudapissedoff2147, thhanks for sharing your oppinions, it may just be you [losing freedom in the USA]
There are hospital that have had to close their burn units because the entire hospital was in danger of bankruptcy just from all the uninsured meth makers who blew themselves up. Some medical ethicists are even discussing whether people who do this should even receive any treatment beyond comfort care! :eek: NatGeo did a show about this, and it said that Vanderbilt University Hospital gives $300 million in charity care every year just to this (IMHO undeserving) patient group.
If this kind of thing is seriously bothering you, you might want to look at the option of moving to New Hampshire for The Free State Project. Apparently enough people have already moved there that it has a tangible effect on the laws there.
Autocorrect fail? Or new device that will fondle me?
Who was driving the car at the time? The 5th Amendment should mean Joe Smith does not have to testify. Some governments are performing an end run around the 5th Amendment by calling these read light tickets “administrative” rather than criminal, and requiring the owner of the vehicle to sign an affidavit identifying the driver if the owner denies being the driver. It is really nothing more than a cash cow for the companies that operate the cameras and the governments that allow them to do so.
I turned autocorrect off on my iPad. It “corrected” stuff that wasn’t wrong.
I borrowed/stole/plagiarized fondleslab from here
How is that different from a regular traffic stop? If someone other than the owner is driving the car and is pulled over then they will have to present ID to the officer.
Sometimes they are wrong. A fuzzy picture in lieu of a successful scan, a snow-covered license plate - my son, a NYS resident, received a fine from Baltimore for running a red light with a silver Ford Pickup. The problem was he had never been to Baltimore and never owned a Ford Pickup.
After going back and forth a couple of times, the clerk admitted that the plate was partially covered by snow and they tried to guess at the plate number from the photo.
Is “License Plate Guesser” a new job title or something?
I don’t suppose that a snow-covered license plate would be a useful defense in Florida, however.
Yes, too often these things are quick and easy money for municipalities, and I wouldn’t put it past them to orchestrate quick change times on lights in order to collect more money. It certainly creates an adversarial relationship between government and citizens when they do things like that. I also agree that the burden of proof shouldn’t be on the accused, and understand the frustration with a system that is designed to load the dice against the citizenry.
True, but the state has the burden of proving all of the elements of the offense, including the identity of the driver. With a regular stop, the officer can testify that the person accused was in fact driving that day. He can also be cross examined on a number of grounds, depending on other circumstances and the charges in a particular case. With a camera, all they have is a picture of the tag…no way to identify the driver. I understand they will usually have someone…perhaps an employee of the camera company…testify that the camera was properly aligned/calibrated with the traffic light, but that still does not identify the driver.
Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.
What does the court say when this defense is presented?
Regards,
Shodan
Granted this was TV, but I’d like to know if this was real. In one episode of Monk, the murderer was undone due to an automatic traffic photo of a driver running a red light. The photo showed the driver and passenger full front, through the windshield. Are there really traffic cameras that can do that?
Given screen name, I would assume that the most recent assault on his/her freedom was related to the purchase of pseudoephedrine. (psuedo=suda)
Happy New Year Dope. :eyeroll:
Nevermind. Misread the post I was replying to.
NO! Freedom to the letters!!