Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional • Hacker News Board

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#621

Post by throwway120385 » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

philipwhiuk wrote: post #280

throwway120385 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The burden is on you to explain why the US should do things the way other countries do. What's better for everyone about that? Why should we change our notion of justice to make you feel better about it?

> The burden is on you to explain why the US should do things the way other countries do. What's better for everyone about that? In short: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/19...

What proportion of road deaths are due to people running red lights versus just driving too fast for conditions, or being impaired at the wheel, or any number of things that these cameras don't enforce?

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#622

Post by LorenPechtel » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:11 PM UTC

triceratops wrote: post #472

LorenPechtel wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real world, sin taxes lead to sin.

Explain. Is this like "guys walking with rifles in the woods cause deer"?

When you have a sin tax the government benefits from the sin. Thus it does not take effective measures to reduce the sin.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#623

Post by LorenPechtel » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:20 PM UTC

SecretDreams wrote: post #456

LorenPechtel wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a regression to the mean issue at work. Sometimes an intersection simply has bad luck, draws more accidents than anything about it would cause. Put a camera there, you'll see an "improvement".

One might argue the intersection itself is the problem and should be redesigned, as well as adjoining roadways feeding into the offending intersection.

If it's consistently high something needs fixing. But accidents are random, there will always be some intersections that by pure chance have more accidents. Put cameras on those, presto, cameras "work".

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#624

Post by tmtvl » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:33 PM UTC

dangood wrote: post #101

CapitalistCartr wrote: post #18

We have red light cameras here in Tampa. I don't know all the details of what it takes to make a right on red and not get a ticket, so I do exaggerated stops to be sure. I know what the law claims but that doesn't matter. The real law is the actual (proprietary) code rumning in the machine. Not what the law says. Not what the contract says. Not what the requirements say. Not what the programmer thinks the code does.

Sorry, but what is the concern, that you don't know when you've crossed a red light? Or that the software is too stupid to know when a light was red?

In some parts of the U.S.A. it's legal to turn right through a red light. GP was wondering if the software can tell that the driver was making a legal right turn through the red instead of doing the thing that's obviously illegal everywhere because it's just a matter of time until you kill someone.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#625

Post by tmtvl » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:37 PM UTC

NetMageSCW wrote: post #388

spankalee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subjectivity in applying the law is a huge problem, especially given how corrupt and violent police are. Red light cameras remove police from the equation for that infraction and apply the law evenly. They also scale in a way that police just can't, and that's extremely important for safety. I live in a city where red light running is an epidemic. Drivers flagrantly just don't stop, and it kills people all the time.…

“all the time” When was the last person killed by someone running a red light? When was the time before that?

Well, in 2019 an estimated 840 people died in the U.S.A. by red light running (https://ncsrsafety.org/stop-on-red/red-light-running-fatalit...>). That's about 2.3 people a day, so last person killed by someone running a red light was statistically about 10.5 hours ago, the last one before that about 21 hours ago.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#626

Post by triceratops » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:41 PM UTC

LorenPechtel wrote: post #622

triceratops wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Explain. Is this like "guys walking with rifles in the woods cause deer"?

When you have a sin tax the government benefits from the sin. Thus it does not take effective measures to reduce the sin.

So you only read the first part of my sentence and not the second part. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47314756 here you can read it again.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#627

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:44 PM UTC

NetMageSCW wrote: post #387

timeinput wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bre…

Why did you break the law, and why do you still break the law when you know you won’t get caught?

[deleted]

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#628

Post by mixdup » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:51 PM UTC

quietbritishjim wrote: post #575

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…

In the UK, speeding fines are also backed by "points" added to your license - get enough of them and you lose your license altogether for a while. It's similar in at least some other European countries. That is a definite punishment for anyone that cares enough about driving that they were doing it in the first place, while also clearly not being revenue generating (in fact it prevents future fine revenue). I'm not s…

Points on your license are already a thing in most states in the US

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#629

Post by causal » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 2:56 PM UTC

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.

Wow this sparked a lot of tedious debate. Just wanted to clarify that I'm talking about the law as written, not some high-level philosophical ideal.

Re: Florida judge rules red light camera tickets are unconstitutional

#630

Post by _heimdall » Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 3:42 PM UTC

estearum wrote: post #603

_heimdall wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're coming with the assumption that pro-social is a universal goal, and that it is objectively good. I'm not even disagreeing with you here, but that's a huge assumption yo make and you are granting pretty broad authority to the state in the name of that goal. Where do you draw the line of power the state shouldn't have despite it using the authority today towards pro-social goals?

Yes I do think things that are good for society are objectively good insofar as "objectively good" has any meaning at all. Automated traffic enforcement isn't "granting" any new authority whatsoever to the state. The state already has the authority, it just uses it unfairly and imperfectly enough to fail to produce meaningful deterrence. > Where do you draw the line of power the state shouldn't have despite it using…

Its usually much harder to decide what's good for society than its made out to be. Externalities matter, something can seem good for society today and turn out to have serious downsides that either weren't known upfront or didn't show up until later.

With regards to authority here, this absolutely is a case of granting more power and authority to the state, or more specifically the state claiming it.

The judge here said its illegal to use redlight cameras in certain situations. Based on the prior comment, if California found a loophole so they can get to the same end by labeling it something different that is them functionally claiming new authority. The judge says its illegal, the state says no its not we can do this anyway.