Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 325 posts

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#101

Post by xigency »

kejaed wrote: post #96
xigency wrote: post #43

I'm interested in this because I know PE exams exist and there are licensing bodies for engineers. But what I've heard from most people is that they are a waste of time and money for someone holding an engineering degree unless you are the person who rubber stamps things at the end. Does someone who knows more about professional engineering know if this law in Oregon is uncommon? Beyond a free speech argument, it see…

It is the same thing in Canada. "Engineer" is a protected term so that people can trust that when someone calls themselves an engineer, or does "engineering work", offering services to the public, they can trust that means something. One difference is that the profession is 'Self Regulating', meaning Professional Engineers Ontario is a non-governmental body made up of Professional Engineers that is trusted by the gov…

The problem I see with that law, and I believe it is possibly the same issue in the U.S. with many state laws is that, as well defined as it is, if I mix and match the terms from the definition then someone with an economics degree from an engineering school needs a professional license to do their own taxes...

"The practice of professional engineering means... any act of evaluating that requires application of engineering principles... and concerns economic interests."

It's not quite a bullet-proof concept. I doubt the U.S. Supreme Court is going to take this issue on at the time. But if I had a background in engineering and law and considered these laws in context, they seem a bit stupid. Most B.S. engineering graduates aren't professionally licensed but obviously are qualified to work and designate themselves as some type of engineer, at least on LinkedIn.

In any case, it seems the term to be protected is "Professional Engineer" or "Licensed Engineer" and not the generic title itself, and the scope should be limited by specifying what jobs require that license instead of a blanket statement. For example, "all bridges on public roads require work to be certified by a professional licensed engineer."

Edit:

In the earlier discussion, there was some debate about whether measuring the hypotenuse of a triangle is legal in public in Oregon.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#102

Post by vvanders »

notheguyouthink wrote: post #91
vvanders wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Going faster does not improve the speed of traffic. The parent never said that. When you merge on onto the freeway to need to merge at the fucking speed of traffic . I've been in so many cases stuck behind a clueless oregon driver merging onto I-5(70mph) at 35-40mph while there's a fucking semi bearing down on us 1/4-1/8th of a mile away. It's goddamn dangerous and putting people in situations where someone is goin…

edit : Apparently wanting to see data is offensive to drivers on HN. /shrug

It's not just incident numbers, when you get two slow drivers/semis blocking the lanes you have a large number(10+ cars) that tend to tailgate way under safe following distances. I've seen 5 cars all stacked together under one car length on many occasions.

All it takes is one stupid/wrong move and you have a massive pileup.

Most of the speeding accidents I've seen along I-5 tend to be single car unless they cross the divider.

Whenever I see it happen I usually double my following distance and let all the idiots sort it out but most people just tend to put themselves in a position where they don't have an exit if something goes wrong.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#103

Post by hobbyjogger »

rgbrenner wrote: post #2

That's just insulting... the state says they acted unconstitutionally.. so they offered him $500 -- which is just a refund of the fine he already paid -- and asked the court to dismiss the case. After he had to pay 4 years of lawyers fees, take them to court, etc. It's just a big FU, and I have no doubt they won't change a thing if they successfully get the court to dismiss it. If the court allows this, then the stat…

> force you to pay thousands to lawyers

From the article:

> but Järlström and his attorneys from the Institute for Justice

IFJ is a non-profit (that has received Charity Navigator's 4-star rating for 16 years in a row)[1]. That's not to say that what Oregon has done here is right (not by any means) but Järlström surely hasn't paid IFJ anything.

[1] http://ij.org/ij-receives-charity-navigators-highest-rating-...

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#104

Post by [deleted] »

walshemj wrote: post #89
patcheudor wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are very popular laws in the US with every state having some level of certification requirement for certain professions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_and_licensure_in_en...

Including FFS Estate Agents (Relators)

[deleted]

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#105

Post by subhobroto »

uniformlyrandom wrote: post #65
ajmurmann wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most annoyingly, as someone who lives in Oregon I don't want to pay for this. I certainly want the poor guy who tried to fix something broken to be hugely compensated. However, I want whoever did this to pay for it. I also want then to stop focusing traffic tickets on speeding and instead fine people who cause traffic jams by not accelerating when entering the freeway or go unnecessary slow. But well that's of course…

> most native Oregonians would be fine constantly because they drive insanely slow And this is why they do not want you to drive slow. The difference of speed between cars is what causes accidents. This is why speed limits are raised based on 90th percentile speeds. And this is why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that.

> why everyone in California drives 80 in 65, and CHP are apparently OK with that.

Absolutely untrue. My wife was ticketed by the CHP for driving at 80 on an empty I5 early in the morning. There was no traffic and she was the only other car on that stretch of the I5 at that time.

We seriously considered figting the ticket but I was unable to collect any data to prove that 90 percentile of the traffic drives at 80 although that's my own observation.

The ticket was cited using PACING and the officer did not have a recently calibrated odometer which gave us an upperhand but that would not be enough to dismiss the case.

We also researched and found out that the AAA lobbies to keep statutory speed limits down at 65 wherever a higher speed is proposed.

We then considered the pros of paying $500 for a ticket and traffic school vs paying thousands in insurance premiums for the next few years.

We ended up paying $500.

65 is the statutory speed limit barring higher prima facie limits. Any higher speed is illegal. Not getting a ticket while driving at 80 does not mean the CHP is OK with it, just that there are far more drivers than CHP officers.

PS: If anyone knows how to strike a deal with the prosecutor/DA's office without getting an attorney involved for trivial traffic tickets like this, I am all ears.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#106

Post by baldfat »

simook wrote: post #80
ajmurmann wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most annoyingly, as someone who lives in Oregon I don't want to pay for this. I certainly want the poor guy who tried to fix something broken to be hugely compensated. However, I want whoever did this to pay for it. I also want then to stop focusing traffic tickets on speeding and instead fine people who cause traffic jams by not accelerating when entering the freeway or go unnecessary slow. But well that's of course…

Going faster does not improve the speed of traffic. Matter of fact if everyone drove the actual speed limit we wouldn't have such a bad trafffic problem. Our infranstructure was designed to handle a range of speeds, primarily for the timing systems. When people drive outside those limits, that's when traffic patterns become unpredictable and/or unmanageable. The slow drivers are no different than the fast drivers. Bo…

We have traffic due to lack of scientific understanding. http://www.science20.com/gerhard_adam/driving_traffic_and_tw...

Traffic = Flow Rate (How many cars pass per minute pass a specific point)

Traffic Solution is maintain proper distance. 2 seconds in good weather and 4 seconds when hazardous or 10 seconds when extremely unsafe weather/conditions.

When people increase the distance between cars during traffic causes the traffic behind to eventually come to a stop.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#107

Post by aidenn0 »

joering2 wrote: post #72

Am I missing something? Isn't he eligible to recover reasonable attorney fees?

It is very rare in the US to be able to recover attorney fees.

IANAL, but it typically only happens if there is a specific statute, or pre-existing contractual arrangement specifying it. Some states, for example, designate that attorney fees should be awarded if a plaintiff pursued a lawsuit despite knowing there was no grounds for it. Also many anti-discrimination laws also have such rules.

That's the general rule, but I have zero knowledge of Oregon's laws.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#108

Post by slavik81 »

xigency wrote: post #43

I'm interested in this because I know PE exams exist and there are licensing bodies for engineers. But what I've heard from most people is that they are a waste of time and money for someone holding an engineering degree unless you are the person who rubber stamps things at the end. Does someone who knows more about professional engineering know if this law in Oregon is uncommon? Beyond a free speech argument, it see…

Every time wrongdoing by an 'engineer' comes up on HN, there's a chorus of voices excusing it.

IMO, the primary difference between the licensed engineer and the unlicensed engineer is responsibility. The person who signs off on the safety of a project does not get to pass the buck. They have to be willing to say 'no' to their client or their employer, even if it comes at a personal financial cost.

The rewards for taking on that additional responsibility are fairly minor. You have a little more job security than those without it and you might enjoy a small pay bump. I guess in Oregon you also used to get a somewhat exclusive job title.

You're right that if you have the license but don't have the responsibility, it's a little pointless.

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#109

Post by hobbyjogger »

bob_theslob646 wrote: post #27
zitterbewegung wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best tool in any court case is time.

Seriously, this. It is such bs, since most lawyers are incentivized to take as much time as necessary since they work on an hourly basis.

The lawyers in this specific case work for a non-profit (Institute for Justice) that did not bill Järlström a single dollar.

http://ij.org/ij-receives-charity-navigators-highest-rating-...

Re: Oregon punished an engineer for criticizing red-light cameras. He fought and won

#110

Post by aidenn0 »

peeters wrote: post #40
exabrial wrote: post #37

Hey guys, can we correct the title? It should be "Oregon punished man for Engineer claim, after criticizing their red-light cameras. He fought and won". The current title is very misleading.

I fail to see what's incorrect about the title. The fine was for publishing a technical report about red-light cameras while not being a licensed engineer. You're making it seem like they are unrelated events.

My understanding is that the fine was for referring to himself as an engineer in communication with the government. They also complained about the publishing of the technical report, but that is not what the fine was for.
Post reply on HN