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

Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

cbs12.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 703 posts

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#201

Post by HDThoreaun »

credit_guy wrote: post #169

I know this is not related to the legal merits of the case being discussed, but who runs a red light? In my experience, this is an infarction that occurs very infrequently. Speeding or illegal parking happen all the time, but running a red light? Most people are not suicidal. Edit: Nevermind, I think crossing on yellow and catching a tenth of a second of red counts as running a red light. If it does, it’s something I…

Depending on where you live it is very common. In chicago when they installed the cameras they lowered the yellow duration to like half a second so people were constantly running them for a while. Then running yellows became normalized, and just ignoring lights from bikers which drivers noticed, and now when traffic is low its not uncommon to see people just treat lights as stop signs if they think no one is coming.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#202

Post by pixl97 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #135
embedding-shape wrote: post #2

Seems the fact that it was a "red light camera" is completely irrelevant? The relevant part: > The defendant argued the statute unconstitutionally requires the registered owner to prove they were not driving — instead of requiring the government to prove who was behind the wheel. Bit like having to prove you weren't the one breaking in , rather than the police having to prove you were guilty. In light of this, seems…

> seems like a no-brainer no one could disagree with. I disagree completely. This is how speed and red light cameras operate in my country. If you weren't the one driving, it's straight forward to show that. The other party can admit to the offence or you can present evidence including the camera itself. The burden is low. Camera infractions do not carry license demerit points because of this ongerent uncertainty. Wh…

I mean this entire case was the state attempting to have its case and eat it too.

These US states considered them moving infractions with points. Now the state must adjust by removing points or doing its due diligence.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#203

Post by paulddraper »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #28
californical wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, but these are civil tickets rather than criminal charges. And since there’s already many laws and regulations around owning a car, such as registration… isn’t it trivial to say “you are responsible for a car that you register by default” In the same way, if your car fails emissions tests, you can’t register it and it’s the responsibility of the owner to ensure that their car meets emissions standard…

>I see your point, but these are civil tickets rather than criminal charges. Yeah that's what they said when ICE was unilaterally kicking in doors. The way I see it anything that would prompt the government to use violence upon you without you taking action to escalate deserves the same level of protection for the accused as a "real" criminal matter. Yes I'm aware this includes just about everything beyond library la…

Criminal offenses are punishable by incarceration.

Civil offenses are not.

---

Mild speeding, no seatbelt, broken taillight are civil.

DUIs, reckless driving, hit-and-run are criminal.

All vehicular offenses, but different punishments.

---

Unauthorized immigration to the US is NOT punishable by incarceration. (It can result in deportation to the nation of origin.)

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#204

Post by carlosjobim »

cromka wrote: post #10
embedding-shape wrote: post #2

Seems the fact that it was a "red light camera" is completely irrelevant? The relevant part: > The defendant argued the statute unconstitutionally requires the registered owner to prove they were not driving — instead of requiring the government to prove who was behind the wheel. Bit like having to prove you weren't the one breaking in , rather than the police having to prove you were guilty. In light of this, seems…

Not the same. They know the car was yours so, by extension, you should be aware of its whereabouts at any given moment. If it wasn't you driving, you know who. An illegal activity was committed using your tool and you know who did it. They have every right to question you. If you do not know, you testify as such, but then again you need to plausibly explain why was someone operating your car while you were not aware…

> you should be aware of its whereabouts at any given moment.

Why? Americans liberated themselves from this kind of relationship with the government hundreds of years ago.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#205

Post by Symbiote »

youarentrightjr wrote: post #179
SoftTalker wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is generally: nobody has a right to drive a car, it's something we permit by issuing a license and other regulations. One of the conditions is that the owner of a vehicle is ultimately responsible for it. The judge in this case disagreed, because the red light infraction was not a simple civil fine but quasi-criminal, e.g. points on drivers license, possibly resulting in suspension, etc.

> I think the argument is generally: nobody has a right to drive a car, it's something we permit by issuing a license and other regulations. One of the conditions is that the owner of a vehicle is ultimately responsible for it. Do you know you can be licensed to drive a vehicle without owning one, and similarly, own one without being licensed to drive it? Why would the owner of the property be responsible for someone…

Because they bought the most dangerous tool we have in common use, and society decided to make the law.

The owner isn't responsible for the drivers actions, but they are required to name the driver. (Or declare the car stolen etc.)

(At least in much of Europe.)

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#206

Post by wffurr »

t1234s wrote: post #32

Having driven in the UK and coming back to the US I miss all of the roundabouts. Any reason (aside from contractor profits) towns use 4-way traffic light systems vs a roundabout and some yield signs?

Come to Massachusetts, we have a lot of roundabouts and even a few old style two lane rotaries.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#207

Post by timeinput »

lateforwork wrote: post #108
idle_zealot wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and they don’t show leniency. If policing is done by robots, then humans are expected to be infallible. This is bad when applied to laws that were written with an exception of leniency and selectivity in enforcement, which is quite a lot of them. For running red lights though? I don't mind if the robots take you off the road automatically.

Running red lights? That's not all the cameras are used for. If are making a right turn on red and didn't come to a complete stop first you can get a ticket.

But why would you do that? Especially if you know there are robots enforcing that you come to a complete stop?

There are many places that don't even allow rights (or lefts) on red.

I got a right on red ticket once, and then I made it a point to obey the law -- especially at the intersections with the robots.

For things like traffic laws especially (where there are very simple cut and dry rules), why is it okay to break the law, and why is it not okay for robots to enforce the law?

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#208

Post by pixl97 »

kamarg wrote: post #187
credit_guy wrote: post #169

I know this is not related to the legal merits of the case being discussed, but who runs a red light? In my experience, this is an infarction that occurs very infrequently. Speeding or illegal parking happen all the time, but running a red light? Most people are not suicidal. Edit: Nevermind, I think crossing on yellow and catching a tenth of a second of red counts as running a red light. If it does, it’s something I…

Where I live, it's common to see at least one person run a red at every major intersection and not just for left turns that couldn't be made due to cross-traffic. Quite often these drivers have expired temp tags which means they don't have insurance because you have to show you registered your vehicle to get insurance. Enforcement is awful so people have been trained to realize there's virtually no consequences to th…

>drivers have expired temp tags

Then the state needs to start doing immediate impoundment of these vehicles. Add on massive fines before release of the car for repeat offenders and you'll see this dry up pretty quick.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#209

Post by [deleted] »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #168
brigade wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, you have the right to say nothing at all; there is no requirement to incriminate someone else to protect yourself. Second, you can still generally invoke the 5th amendment during testimony even if you already claimed someone else did it. You aren't under oath until said testimony, so it still protects against you having to choose between committing perjury or self-incrimination, and doing so cannot be used as…

No, you don't always have the right to say nothing at all. Courts can compel testimony and punish you if you don't. And you plead the 5th after going under oath. And you can't just plead the 5th to any question. If the prosection puts you under oath and asks you your name, you can't plead the 5th to that

[deleted]
Post reply on HN