From one of the comments on the article: “The violators receive a “notice of violation”, are not charged with any criminal act, and thus have no due process to dispute the allegation. ”
If the above is correct, what ever happened to “innocent until proven guilty” and the right to confront one’s accuser?
captnhal, that commenter said the Houston tickets were considered civil cases and didn’t affect driving records. The standard in a civil case is preponderance of evidence, different standard than in a criminal case. Of course, since people have found out that they can’t be reported to the credit bureaus, it doesn’t go on their driving record, and they can still re-register their cars, Houston is probably starting to have difficulty in collecting these civil fines too.
The police are grossly inept at solving or preventing actual crime but constantly alert and vigilant with respect to revenue producing traffic violations. In my humble opinion, there should always be an option of community service in lieu of a fine. That would adequately deter the infraction without making it appear that the police were glad you did it.
I read somewhere a few days ago that one municipality had gone the opposite route. Instead of fining people for violating the speed limit or running a red light, they were taking pictures of cars that obeyed the law. The drivers were then entered into a lottery with $100 prize or something like that.
Crashes, speeding, and running red lights were all down in that city.
I wish I could find the article. It seems to be a case of “the carrot is better than the stick.”
Gitarcarver: But what about the revenues, won’t someone do something about the revenues?
When I used to live in Toronto, they had mobile speeding cameras and there were a lot of complaints about their use, but the day the cameras were pulled off the road, I noticed that people started driving like jerks immediately.
I believe cameras can improve safety, but sadly revenue appears to be the driving force behind instituting cameras. It bothers me when law enforcement appears to be driven to act by revenue streams.
Over in Montgomery County Maryland they have put up speed cameras by schools. As with red light cameras there is only a fine with no points assessed to the registered owner of the vehicle. The rationale for the speed cameras of course is that it was “for the safety of the children”. However, unlike lights on roads by schools that only flash when school is in session to indicate a 25 mph speed limit, the speed cameras operate 24 hours per day 365 days per year. Thus you could get a ticket for exceeding the 25 mile speed limit at 2:30 in the morning on a weekend during the summer school break. These speed cameras have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with revenue.
@Richard Nieporent: Do the speed signs have hours posted at which time the speed limit changes? If not, isn’t going 45 in a 25 mph zone ‘speeding’, no matter the day of the week or time of day?
John, with the old system the signs say 25 miles when flashing. Thus it is easy to see that there is a lower speed limit. The standard speed limit for the road (35-45 mph depending on where the road is) is in effect at all other times. With the speed cameras there is no flashing light to indicate the cameras are in operation. There is only a small sign that is easy to miss if you have not driven the road before indicating there is a speed camera ahead and that the speed limit has dropped to 25 mph. Thus a 45 mph road will suddenly become a 25 mph road for the short distance that it takes to pass the school. If you were within the speed limit for the road and missed the sign, by the time you see the school is ahead it is too late to slow down because the speed camera will have already gone off.
I know that the state of Florida had a lengthy and protracted legal battle over the legality of the cameras. Lawyers and clients demanded to see the computer programming and records of the cameras. The companies who make the cameras and the government fought tooth and nail to not have proprietary information made public.
Eventually the government and the companies won, so there is no way that a citizen can actually see the maintenance records or examine the code to see if there is a flaw in the code. The argument that the camera was flawed is no longer allowed as far as I know.
If the judge eventually rules in the case in favor of the (35,000) drivers in the class action suit, the drivers won’t get a citation refund of $125, they’ll only get $75 and the remaining $50 will be taken as attorney’s fees.
Honestly, in traffic court, if it were innocent until proven guilty, you would be hard pressed to ever get convicted of a speeding ticket. Beyond a reasonable doubt. So, yeah, for better or worse society has chosen to look the other way on traffic offenses.
13 Comments
From one of the comments on the article: “The violators receive a “notice of violation”, are not charged with any criminal act, and thus have no due process to dispute the allegation. ”
If the above is correct, what ever happened to “innocent until proven guilty” and the right to confront one’s accuser?
I have read that in Philadelphia (on Roosevelt Boulevard) red light cameras actually have had a significant effect on safety.
captnhal, that commenter said the Houston tickets were considered civil cases and didn’t affect driving records. The standard in a civil case is preponderance of evidence, different standard than in a criminal case. Of course, since people have found out that they can’t be reported to the credit bureaus, it doesn’t go on their driving record, and they can still re-register their cars, Houston is probably starting to have difficulty in collecting these civil fines too.
The police are grossly inept at solving or preventing actual crime but constantly alert and vigilant with respect to revenue producing traffic violations. In my humble opinion, there should always be an option of community service in lieu of a fine. That would adequately deter the infraction without making it appear that the police were glad you did it.
I read somewhere a few days ago that one municipality had gone the opposite route. Instead of fining people for violating the speed limit or running a red light, they were taking pictures of cars that obeyed the law. The drivers were then entered into a lottery with $100 prize or something like that.
Crashes, speeding, and running red lights were all down in that city.
I wish I could find the article. It seems to be a case of “the carrot is better than the stick.”
Gitarcarver: But what about the revenues, won’t someone do something about the revenues?
When I used to live in Toronto, they had mobile speeding cameras and there were a lot of complaints about their use, but the day the cameras were pulled off the road, I noticed that people started driving like jerks immediately.
I believe cameras can improve safety, but sadly revenue appears to be the driving force behind instituting cameras. It bothers me when law enforcement appears to be driven to act by revenue streams.
Over in Montgomery County Maryland they have put up speed cameras by schools. As with red light cameras there is only a fine with no points assessed to the registered owner of the vehicle. The rationale for the speed cameras of course is that it was “for the safety of the children”. However, unlike lights on roads by schools that only flash when school is in session to indicate a 25 mph speed limit, the speed cameras operate 24 hours per day 365 days per year. Thus you could get a ticket for exceeding the 25 mile speed limit at 2:30 in the morning on a weekend during the summer school break. These speed cameras have nothing to do with safety and everything to do with revenue.
@Richard Nieporent: Do the speed signs have hours posted at which time the speed limit changes? If not, isn’t going 45 in a 25 mph zone ‘speeding’, no matter the day of the week or time of day?
I can’t speak for MD, but in CA the signs say “25 MPH When Children Are Present.”
John, with the old system the signs say 25 miles when flashing. Thus it is easy to see that there is a lower speed limit. The standard speed limit for the road (35-45 mph depending on where the road is) is in effect at all other times. With the speed cameras there is no flashing light to indicate the cameras are in operation. There is only a small sign that is easy to miss if you have not driven the road before indicating there is a speed camera ahead and that the speed limit has dropped to 25 mph. Thus a 45 mph road will suddenly become a 25 mph road for the short distance that it takes to pass the school. If you were within the speed limit for the road and missed the sign, by the time you see the school is ahead it is too late to slow down because the speed camera will have already gone off.
I know that the state of Florida had a lengthy and protracted legal battle over the legality of the cameras. Lawyers and clients demanded to see the computer programming and records of the cameras. The companies who make the cameras and the government fought tooth and nail to not have proprietary information made public.
Eventually the government and the companies won, so there is no way that a citizen can actually see the maintenance records or examine the code to see if there is a flaw in the code. The argument that the camera was flawed is no longer allowed as far as I know.
Which brings us to this story out of Orlando and Orange County, FL:
http://www.wftv.com/news/25802690/detail.html
If the judge eventually rules in the case in favor of the (35,000) drivers in the class action suit, the drivers won’t get a citation refund of $125, they’ll only get $75 and the remaining $50 will be taken as attorney’s fees.
That’s $1.75 million in lawyer’s fees.
“If the above is correct, what ever happened to “innocent until proven guilty” and the right to confront one’s accuser?”
in traffic law the burden of proof was reversed decades ago.
Honestly, in traffic court, if it were innocent until proven guilty, you would be hard pressed to ever get convicted of a speeding ticket. Beyond a reasonable doubt. So, yeah, for better or worse society has chosen to look the other way on traffic offenses.