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

301–310 of 703 posts

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#301

Post by aziaziazi »

ggiigg wrote: post #292
hamdingers wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's new speed camera pilot (AB 645) explicitly solves for this. Tickets issued by these cameras are civil penalties issued to the owner of the vehicle, like parking tickets, rather than a criminal moving violation. This means the tickets are just as constitutional as parking tickets. It also means penalties are limited to fines and can't impact your driving privilege or insurance. Hopefully other states can…

Yea, that would be great then I can completely ignore them as I am not poor. It just turns speeding into something you can buy.

While I agree with your sarcasm, this proposal is a least bad scenario: no enforcement is worse as there’s less incentive to respect the lights.

Sadly money and power buying freedom of law isn’t restricted to road rules.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#302

Post by degamad »

vkou wrote: post #274
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.

If someone used the car without permission, they are guilty of theft. If they used the car with your permission, you should either be responsible for what they do with it, or be able to point to the person who was using it.

> If someone used the car without permission, they are guilty of theft.

Sure, but I still don't know who they are, so I can't give their name over for either investigating the theft or reassigning the speeding/red light/parking fine.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#304

Post by hamdingers »

sowbug wrote: post #298
hamdingers wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's new speed camera pilot (AB 645) explicitly solves for this. Tickets issued by these cameras are civil penalties issued to the owner of the vehicle, like parking tickets, rather than a criminal moving violation. This means the tickets are just as constitutional as parking tickets. It also means penalties are limited to fines and can't impact your driving privilege or insurance. Hopefully other states can…

Consistent, low-impact enforcement is better at preventing unwanted behavior than the rare and severe but also capricious enforcement performed by human police. It can also give permission for unwanted behavior. Cf. the Haifa study, where the rate of late pickups increased when daycares added a fine. One explanation is the fine turned a complex moral obligation into an ordinary financial transaction.

Sure. Then the bill requires that all those fines you pay go towards street calming infrastructure, eventually making it physically impossible (or at least very uncomfortable) for you to continue speeding.

Kind of like if enough parents paid the late pickup fee, eventually the daycare could afford a van for dropoffs.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#305

Post by ggiigg »

aziaziazi wrote: post #301
ggiigg wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, that would be great then I can completely ignore them as I am not poor. It just turns speeding into something you can buy.

While I agree with your sarcasm, this proposal is a least bad scenario: no enforcement is worse as there’s less incentive to respect the lights. Sadly money and power buying freedom of law isn’t restricted to road rules.

I would argue such enforcement does not need automation and such automation is often for revenue generation vs saftey focused.

Also, I am a bit biased here after working at flock.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#306

Post by ratelimitsteve »

crote wrote: post #146
Vaslo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if I know who, why would I ever give that information to the court?

Let's say your friend borrow your car and drives through a red light. You don't have to tell the court that it was them, but as the car owner you'll be held responsible for what the car was used for if you don't.

here's the thing about that: it's absolutely not true at all. once again, in the place where this ruling took place (and, therefore, the place we're talking about) the people who accuse you of a crime have to prove that it was definitely you that did it. an accusation doesn't put the burden of proof on you to prove that you didn't, or to find who actually did. this isn't a phoenix wright game, or an argument with your mom. if the state can't prove that it was you, then it wasn't.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#307

Post by htx80nerd »

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…

>"The judge frames the red light camera scheme as a revenue generating scheme, not a public safety measure."

In my own experience, when they took down the red light cameras in my area now people are not afraid to run red lights ~2 to ~3 seconds after it's red. See this kind of thing on a regular basis. Every now and then there's a serious accident.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#308

Post by ratelimitsteve »

tuckerman wrote: post #174
crote wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say your friend borrow your car and drives through a red light. You don't have to tell the court that it was them, but as the car owner you'll be held responsible for what the car was used for if you don't.

It seems like that is not the case in Florida according to this judge.

it's not true anywhere in america, at the very least.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#309

Post by BrandonM »

wffurr wrote: post #194
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…

Running reds is a favorite pastime of Boston area drivers. Enter just after the yellow and buzz the pedestrians waiting, lurk in the middle of the road and make a left turn once oncoming traffic is stopped for the red, or just blow it for the hell of it.

> lurk in the middle of the road and make a left turn once oncoming traffic is stopped for the red

In the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, this is the proper way to make a left-hand turn. Many intersections are designed such that this is the only realistic way to ever turn left (high traffic, no left arrow).

Most red light rules are written against entering the intersection on red. If you're already in the intersection, you're allowed to safely proceed through and out of the intersection on red. That can be challenging, of course, if oncoming traffic is running the red light.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#310

Post by giantg2 »

htx80nerd wrote: post #307
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…

>"The judge frames the red light camera scheme as a revenue generating scheme, not a public safety measure." In my own experience, when they took down the red light cameras in my area now people are not afraid to run red lights ~2 to ~3 seconds after it's red. See this kind of thing on a regular basis. Every now and then there's a serious accident.

The objective evidence indicates that accidents tend to go up after red light cameras go up, generally because the operators lower the yellow light time to increase fees.
Post reply on HN