Ohio speeders WATCH OUT !!!!!

WTF? And we are expected to respect the frickin law??????????

 

So is the company providing the cameras is doing so for a flat rate and not a cut of the ticket proceeds?

That way there's no incentive for them to "adjust" the mechanisms "accidently" to generate revenue for both the company and the city.

Where does the money generated to the city go? Segregated into designated funds for improving roads, signage and street design - real tangible benefits to public safety, or into the general slush fund to incentivise its use by politicians as another revenue source?

Are city and police vehicles exempt, or prescreened out, or do they have to pay tickets for camera violations like everyone else?

I hope your town is different than all the other municipalities that have put in these systems claiming the same benefits, but in those other cities, the details prove otherwise.

 

I got a coupe tickets for that before, it is called "violation of the basic speed law" or VBSL. Cop said "I didnt clock you going fast, but it LOOKED LIKE you were going fast" Tickets were on my Suzuki GSXR 1000...... I said, "the damn thing looks like it is going fast on the kickstand" Tickets stuck, I got fucked...........

James

 

Hmmmmmmmmmm. Is it time not to get mad but get even????

 

Is that site with the blown up and burned up radar cameras in England still on line?

 

Typical justification for a lot of things..."if it saves just one life..." Of course, there is a little thing called a cost-analysis study, but I won't go into the annoying details there. As i said before, speed traps always get justified by the people that implement them. You never really answered the question. if all these cars are doing 50 in a 25 zone, don't you think the road/street/trail is better suited to a HIGHER limit? You said your town is essentially a tourist place (trap). It still sounds to me like nothing more than revenue generation to entrap tourists, one way or the other. Spend money in our stores, or in our court. You have a court, apparently. So, who is your local law enforcement?

From your statements, you sound like every other camera-trap municipality, regardless of your justifications.

 

Frank, You missed mine. I was under the speed limit and was nabbed for not signalling a lane change in IN. $203.00 and 2 points. I rarely passed anything that day including Semi-s and Got plugged. Different stroke, same out come.
Grrrr,
BKR

 

Cited for speeding but wasn't? Do your duty and hire a lawyer, you'll win.

Caught speeding but was? Quit whining and pay the fine.

If everybody obeyed traffic laws the cost of related enforcement activity combined with the cost loss of life and property would plummett. Everybody with half a brain knows that the measly revenue the fines generate don't offset enforcement activity or costs of collecting fines. Fines are designed to deter violations. Laws without penalty don't deter violators.

The laws are too lienient in many instances. Example; If a car is 'estimated' to be speeding in a school zone, the penalty should be "shoot to kill".

 

Speedjoe:
How many DEATHS have you had in your downtown area where the cameras are?
How many crippling injuries have you had?

Is there TRUELY an issue or just a PERCEIVED one?

Constant surveilance that deprives us of our freedoms BEGINS with crap like this. One tiny step at a time for "good reasons" by well meaning but SHORTSIGHTED folk.

Glenn

 

Caught speeding but was? Quit whining and pay the fine.

Your Correct!

Cited for speeding but wasn't? Do your duty and hire a lawyer, you'll win.

WTH!? What planet did you fall in from?
1.) The State isn't required to pass your legal fees in cases like this.
2.) Cost more to defend that is worth. Attn. fees are $100 / $300 per hour. To appear in court some charge a flat rate of $1000.00 plus the other.
3.) They don't pay for time off work.

Mine, the lane change violation:
Trip 1 to Gas City, IN = $80.00 in gas alone plus 7 hours in a car round trip. That would have been to just say "not guilty". Indiana doesn't have provisions on the ticket to mail in and deny responsibility.
Trip 2 to Gas City would have been for the court case: = another $80.00 in gas and another day off work. Then it's a dice roll that the Officer wouldn't show. That would be your only chance to get off the hook.

I rode with a friend to pick up a motor south of Indy about 40 miles less than 2 months after my issue. I counted 6 or 7 vehicles pulled over on I-69 and all but one had out of state tags. It was purely revenue gathering, period. All B.S. If it would have been with "the law of averages" there would have been MORE Indiana cars pulled over that Out of States. They were targeting for the purpose of raising revenue.

If everybody obeyed traffic laws the cost of related enforcement activity combined with the cost loss of life and property would plummett. Everybody with half a brain knows that the measly revenue the fines generate don't offset enforcement activity or costs of collecting fines. Fines are designed to deter violations. Laws without penalty don't deter violators.

Oh sure! It's not a losing proposition for them. Check my fine as an example!

The laws are too lienient in many instances. Example; If a car is 'estimated' to be speeding in a school zone, the penalty should be "shoot to kill".

East Lansing is strict on School Zones. Good for them..
However on Hagadorn Rd. between M-78 and Campus nearly the entire lenght is SZ. Many areas are not within site of a School, Cross Walk or Bus Stop. Another Revenue generator, and it works well. Just not with me because I run below the posted speed or go another route. It's clearly an abuse of power.

 

I am a deputy sheriff in WA state. I have read most of the posts on this particular thread. I do not write notices of infractions on any single measure and our state won't allow me too anyway (visual, radar, lidar,etc). Here are some misconceptions- every cop is one of "them" (sounds a bit paranoid by the way), the speed limit is a minimum speed for some, it is not by the way, you can drive slower than what is posted. I too speed, and when I had not slowed enough from a 65 mph state highway to a 40 mph zone (I was going 47 mph and still slowing) I recieved a citation. I WAS SPEEDING! I didn't whine or complain or call the officer a jackass or worse. I don't like to pay fines either and oh yes I had to report to my immediate supervisor and my sheriff of my transgression. Yes I do stop cars for improper equipment like tail lights, often the driver's don't even know they are burnt out or otherwise inoperative, and no I don't "ticket" for them. If I do see the same vehicle on the road a week later with no brake lights, headlight, etc. I will stop and ticket for it.

 

You sound like the kind of LEO most of us would like to have in our communities.

I'm not on the streets all day like many LEOs - I can only speak to what I see commuting back and forth to work.

What I see is thousands of people routinely exceeding the speed limit every morning and night, in close quarters, with barely an accident among them when you consider the volume of traffic.

When I see close calls, they aren't due to speeding - they're due to people with equipment violations (no brake lights), failure to signal, failure to yield on entrance ramp (a biggie), fail to yield lanes (another biggie) forcing other traffic to pass on the right instead of the left.

Several times a year the HP announces they're "cracking down on speeding" or "cracking down on DUI". Maybe there is a huge rash of speed and drunk driving related accidents outside of rush hours that I don't know about, but what I see, is that the issues causing the most problems are ignored, and speeding (and, to their credit, DUI) is the only thing the police seem to care about despite the overwhelming evidence (rush hour) that it's a non-issue.

Is there something I'm missing here? I think this is a big problem for LEOs perception by the public and it would be a relatively easy thing to change, I would think.

 

I am all for fair enforcement of speed limits. If I'm actually speeding and get a ticket, I will be angry at nobody but myself, and I'll pay it. What I object to is jurisdictions like Benton TN which routinely issue fraudulent speeding citations to people who are not actually speeding solely because they have a tag from a distant state on their vehicle. They are not in the business of law enforcement and public safety, they are in the business of fleecing the traveling public. I have to wonder why state authorities who know what is going on haven't done their job and put them out of business.

 

This is why I love sleepers. Let the Honda civic in red with a silly exhaust and spoiler grab the ticket.

 

I was born and raised right here in the land of the free. If unlawfully accused, basic instinct tells me to stand up for my rights. My mom broke me of whining when I was about four years old, learned it won't get me anything. Stand up for myself since then.

Further, it's my civic duty to defend myself. If I lose the case, I still win my self-respect because I know I tried. Absent the willingness to do that, I'm contributing to the dumbing-down of our great society, just as well buy a one way ticket out of here.

 

i just think your lucky you dont live in jersey. theres like a 3 ticket minimum with the cops out here. and all they are trying to do is fundraise

 

False arrest/accusation, is a crime. That kind of a "law enforcement" needs to be routed out. If it's just one renegade cop interpreting the law indescreetly, court records would bring that out and civil action would get him where it hurts. Those guys are lame-brains and can't comprehend a civillian questioning their authority......... Take the bad actor to court, let your lawyer show him for what he is.

If it's actually a jurisdictional issue, if it's the entire police force, there's pleanty of good places to live in this country. That being the case, I'd move in a heartbeat.

In my neck of the woods, renegade cops are treated as our equal, we just find out where they live...................

 

I heard the police chief from the jurisdiction that suit came from on NPR the other day. For whatever reason, the radar evidence was thrown out, and this particular case relied on the citing officers educated estimate of the speed of the ticketed driver, as is ALWAYS the case when the radar gun is pointed at a car.

The aim of this judgement was not to allow harrassment tickets, or to throw out radar equipment, but reinforced the existing premise that an officers educated estimate of speed can be relied upon. The answer, is, as it always was, YES.

It doesn't take a radar gun to judge that a car is doing 60+ in a 25 mph residential district, or 100+ on the interstate. Instances like this are the focus of the case mentioned, I'm sure we all agree that an individual in a case like this deserves a driving award.

The sky isn't falling, big brother isn't trying to limit our freedom, infringe on our right (other than to blatently exceed posted speed limits), or ruin our fun. Wanna drive 30 over the limit? Fine by me, but shut up when you're ticketed, radar or not.

Brian

 

We here in the States call those silly exhausts... Fart cans er fart blasters..

 

Another Political thread........... oh well, it's made it this far..............


Brian; You got the 'premise' of it right. NPR? You consider Guv'ment controlled news a service to the constitution? Ha.

The judgement favored the government officials' opinions, diluting the requirement for forensic evidence, for the accused to face his accuser and hear evidence, not opinion. This action diminishes the constitutional rights of the citizenry in favor of the rights of state officials. In effect, upgrading the officer's 'opinion' declaring that "opinion" to be considered direct 'evidence'. Give me a break.