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

231–240 of 703 posts

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#231

Post by satvikpendem »

jan_g wrote: post #191
smsm42 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you should be aware of its whereabouts at any given moment Says who? If the car is mine, I am free to do with it whatever I like (of course, excepting criminal acts). I do not owe anybody an account of what I - or the care - did at any particular moment. If the car was used in the commission of a crime, it's up to the prosecution to prove I had something to do with it. If they think I know who did it - prove it and…

But couldn't you then have the same argument for speeding tickets (or parking tickets)? Like, "I don't know who drove my car too fast or parked my car on the curb, so it's not my problem. The state should prove who did it.".

Yes, and that is likely what will happen based on this ruling too, for parking tickets as well.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#232

Post by spunker540 »

causal wrote: post #222
moduspol wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the same logic apply to parking tickets?

No. Parking is leaving your possession somewhere and should apply to the registered owner. It is not illegal to own a car that someone else used to run a red light.

No. Running a red light is when your possession crosses an intersection while the light is red, and should apply to the registered owner.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#233

Post by moduspol »

causal wrote: post #222
moduspol wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the same logic apply to parking tickets?

No. Parking is leaving your possession somewhere and should apply to the registered owner. It is not illegal to own a car that someone else used to run a red light.

I didn't leave my possession. I just owned a car that someone else left.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#234

Post by sixothree »

kstrauser wrote: post #133
jotux wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect this is some light with chronically-bad timing that gets run by tons of people every day. The camera is taking a photo with a bunch of vehicles in the frame and it's ticketing the one that had the license plate unobstructed, even if a few of the vehicles in the frame technically entered the intersection when the light was yellow. Sometimes lights are just so poorly implemented, and drivers pass through them…

My hometown got busted making yellow lights shorter than the legally required duration, then hitting drivers with tickets for running a red light they couldn't have safely and reasonably avoided. There are standards for this kind of thing, like if a light is on a road with a speed limit of X, then a yellow light has to last Y seconds. Imagine a yellow light that lasted .5s: you'd have to stand on your brakes and risk…

In my city they synchronized the light so that each one turns red just as the pack of cars is reaching it. To be clear the obvious implication I'm making is that they did this to increase the chance someone would run the light and increase revenue.

This does mean that if you're in the front of the pack and go about 15 over the speed limit, you won't "catch" the red light.

When you're not in the front of the pack it can be frustrating trying to travel just 3 or 4 miles with the red lights not even a full half mile from each other. Even late at night if you follow the speed limit, you are penalized. You will sit at every red light and look at the vast stretch of nothingness that has the right of way.

If they didn't do this to generate red light revenue, they could have done this to generate more revenue from the gas tax they collect by making people start & stop more often, and from sitting in traffic longer. But I suppose both things could be true. And no, I won't accept any other plausible explanations (/s, but holy heck is government awful here).

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#235

Post by hxorr »

causal wrote: post #222
moduspol wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the same logic apply to parking tickets?

No. Parking is leaving your possession somewhere and should apply to the registered owner. It is not illegal to own a car that someone else used to run a red light.

But is it illegal to own a car that someone else parked in the wrong pkace?

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#236

Post by brigade »

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

That's why I said generally - once testimony is compelled, it can no longer be used against you. And the definite exception for compelling your name is if the government already believes that you committed a crime and is trying to figure out who you are, and you cannot articulate specifically why your name could be incriminating.

5th amendment protections can include questions of identity, if the question of identity is relevant for incrimination. Like, if the government has a warrant for "Joe Smith", you're not required to testify whether that's you. It's usually a waste of time since could just prove it with the non-testimonial evidence that lead to your arrest, but the protection does exist.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#237

Post by wifipunk »

moduspol wrote: post #216
fusslo wrote: post #198

After reading the 21 page order, I do tend to agree with the judge The judge frames the red light camera scheme as a revenue generating scheme, not a public safety measure. Additionally, "A distinctive feature of the statutory scheme is its assignment of guilt to the registered owner rather than the driver of the vehicle". and "If there are multiple registered owners, the citation is issued to the 'first' registered…

Doesn't the same logic apply to parking tickets?

Almost, except parking tickets are still typically civil “owner-liability” citations tied to where the car is parked, while red-light violations are intended to target the driver’s conduct

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#238

Post by devy »

NYC government has thought about the legality of red light cameras. What they made it legal is to have human law enforcement officers review ever single computer flagged speeding footages with zoom out license plates, putting enforcement officer's signature into the tickets mailed out. In the same ticket they also provided a signed affidavit from the red light camera technology vendor's technician who performs weekly technical maintenance to certify that the red light camera is functional proper at the designed technical specifications (violation speed was far exceeds the margin of errors of reported speed etc.) Thus, both signatures satisfied the legal due process in NY state law. And the red light camera tickets mailing out are legal and enforceable.

Sources:

1. yes I got them before when I was driving a lot in Queens, New York City had legal counsel regarding fighting these red light camera tickets.

2. NYC government is quadrupling those cameras as it's a really cheap way to increase municipal revenue and reduce traffic speed. It's working if you drive in Queens NYC you will notice most traffic obey to the speed limits. https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1q8fm89/nyc_to_quadrup...

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#239

Post by SunshineTheCat »

fusslo wrote: post #198

After reading the 21 page order, I do tend to agree with the judge The judge frames the red light camera scheme as a revenue generating scheme, not a public safety measure. Additionally, "A distinctive feature of the statutory scheme is its assignment of guilt to the registered owner rather than the driver of the vehicle". and "If there are multiple registered owners, the citation is issued to the 'first' registered…

I've followed a few cases surrounding traffic cameras that have been ruled unconstitutional on the grounds that individuals have the right to face their accuser.

The question in those cases came down to if the operators of the cam can be considered "accusers."

They widely considered that of course the cam itself didn't count as an accuser, but the question was how "automated" the system was. If there was a human who flagged it, the system was fine, if it was fully automated, they were unconstitutional.

Many states don't share this opinion, but an interesting argument nonetheless.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#240

Post by Muromec »

spunker540 wrote: post #232
causal wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Parking is leaving your possession somewhere and should apply to the registered owner. It is not illegal to own a car that someone else used to run a red light.

No. Running a red light is when your possession crosses an intersection while the light is red, and should apply to the registered owner.

Or is it?
Post reply on HN