|
Driven1
|
 |
« Reply #45 on: February 16, 2008, 10:59:25 PM » |
|
the more i think about this, the more angry i get.
so...the big question is. what is the penalty for NOT paying the "civil infraction" notice i get? what is City Hall going to do to me if i don't pay their fine? i am seriously considering intentionally trying to get one of these just to fight it in court. and i would only NOT pay the fine presumably because i would not be guilty....my friend from NYC would've borrowed my vehicle and ran the red light...not me.
they gonna levee my house? what if i rent and don't own? what can the city do? speaking of that...what if someone from mississippi runs the red light?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gradco2004
|
|
« Reply #46 on: February 16, 2008, 11:16:04 PM » |
|
the more i think about this, the more angry i get.
so...the big question is. what is the penalty for NOT paying the "civil infraction" notice i get? what is City Hall going to do to me if i don't pay their fine? i am seriously considering intentionally trying to get one of these just to fight it in court. and i would only NOT pay the fine presumably because i would not be guilty....my friend from NYC would've borrowed my vehicle and ran the red light...not me.
they gonna levee my house? what if i rent and don't own? what can the city do? speaking of that...what if someone from mississippi runs the red light?
You guys are the best. At first, I was all for them... but now I am having second & thrid thoughts. This screams parking garage all over again. Do you think they will send you to collections for not paying the fine, or another penalty? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Driven1
|
|
« Reply #47 on: February 16, 2008, 11:22:19 PM » |
|
actually, upon more research tonight, it seems that the system probably operates here like in other municipalities...an officer will be required to look at the photo snapped and swear that a violation has occurred... but then it would be a CRIMINAL, not CIVIL violation, which flies in the face of what the ordinance really says...that it would be only a civil violation. so...i'm still not sure. but, in any case..do not fear. the average citizen has 2 practical measures to fight this... 1) purchase ($30) a polarized protective cover or spray paint that reflects back and washes out your license plate or 2) admittedly more drastic and illegal: shoot the offending camera with a hunting rifle... http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/dec/12/police-man-shot-camera-after-it-shot-him |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jbm32206
Guest
|
|
« Reply #48 on: February 17, 2008, 06:17:52 AM » |
|
That certainly does raise some good points, especially given that it presumes your guilt and not innocence...I'm very interested in what comes of this...especially since so many cities are using these cameras at lights.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Charles Hunter
|
|
« Reply #49 on: February 17, 2008, 08:15:18 AM » |
|
actually, upon more research tonight, it seems that the system probably operates here like in other municipalities...an officer will be required to look at the photo snapped and swear that a violation has occurred... but then it would be a CRIMINAL, not CIVIL violation, which flies in the face of what the ordinance really says...that it would be only a civil violation. so...i'm still not sure. but, in any case..do not fear. the average citizen has 2 practical measures to fight this... 1) purchase ($30) a polarized protective cover or spray paint that reflects back and washes out your license plate or 2) admittedly more drastic and illegal: shoot the offending camera with a hunting rifle... http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/dec/12/police-man-shot-camera-after-it-shot-himThe guys on "Mythbusters" looked at several of these devices, and found that the cameras could defeat most of them. And, once these cameras get on-line the police may be more zealous in enforcing the existing laws on obscuring your license plate. Especially if the revenue goes to the police. Get one of those "Support the Arts tags" - they are almost impossible to read anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Driven1
|
|
« Reply #50 on: February 17, 2008, 09:29:52 AM » |
|
from what i've read, mythbusters looked at the spray and proved it wrong...but only with a high-tech digital camera...not a 500w flash bulb traffic camera. apparently, the protective cover (more expensive) does work though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jbm32206
Guest
|
|
« Reply #51 on: February 17, 2008, 10:47:51 AM » |
|
Wouldn't it just be easier to follow the speed limit and avoid getting caught?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Driven1
|
|
« Reply #52 on: February 17, 2008, 11:14:06 AM » |
|
Wouldn't it just be easier to follow the speed limit and avoid getting caught?
ok...the point is not about complying with the law. if you haven't gotten the point yet (from previous posts by various posters), no amount of me or anyone else explaining it further is going to help. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jbm32206
Guest
|
|
« Reply #53 on: February 17, 2008, 11:24:18 AM » |
|
Wouldn't it just be easier to follow the speed limit and avoid getting caught?
ok...the point is not about complying with the law. if you haven't gotten the point yet (from previous posts by various posters), no amount of me or anyone else explaining it further is going to help. I completely understand the intent of most posters and what they've said...most of which revolves around feeling that their rights are being violated to giving pointers on how to avoid having your tag photographed. Which is what I've gotten from your posts. It's so much easier to have a discussion when you leave out the rude and condescending attitude. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
KenFSU
|
|
« Reply #54 on: February 17, 2008, 12:13:22 PM » |
|
Try this one on for size:
I haven't seen a specific camera vendor listed by the city yet, but it's safe to guess that Automated Computer Systems (ACS), a subsidiary of massive military contractor Lockheed Martin that installs and operates between 80 and 90 percent of these traffic cameras nationwide, will be the contractor chosen to do the job here in Jacksonville.
Guess what there "percentage" of the cut is in other cities?
FORTY PERCENT.
The cameras typically cost around $60,000 each. Citations range from $125 to $300. Assuming the average citation falls right in the middle of that range, the Washington-based Lockheed Martin is looking at raking in $85 per Jacksonville infraction.
Minor maintainence fees aside, this means that once these cameras dole out about 700 citations, which I'd guess wouldn't even take a year, the cameras are paid for, and it's nearly straight profit for Lockheed Martin for YEARS.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jbm32206
Guest
|
|
« Reply #55 on: February 17, 2008, 12:21:35 PM » |
|
That's without a doubt...you know darn well that they wouldn't be doing any of this if they weren't going to make a pretty penny. It's a disgrace though, how much they'll end up making, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gatorback
|
|
« Reply #56 on: February 17, 2008, 01:27:44 PM » |
|
You know how some signs are placed up to warn motorist of the speed trap, I'm sure you have seen these "RADAR" ahead, etc. Well, could we place flashing Red Lights with LED "CAMERAS AT INTERSECTION." signs on the approach to the intersection itself? That would cause people to think twice about running it, even the yellow or not completely stop before turning left or right if permitted. If you ran a yellow, red, or were speeding through all that, then you deserve a ticket. Let's see if the vendor would be willing to pay for warning signs too for even a bigger cut of the revenue.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 01:31:09 PM by gatorback »
|
Logged
|
'As a sinner I am truly conscious of having often offended my Creator and I beg him to forgive me, but as a Queen and Sovereign, I am aware of no fault or offence for which I have to render account to anyone here below.' Mary, queen of Scots to her jailer, Sir Amyas Paulet; October 1586
|
|
|
|
Charles Hunter
|
|
« Reply #57 on: February 17, 2008, 03:15:18 PM » |
|
Interesting point about the vendor ... does the ordinance name a vendor? Will the City put this out to bid? I mean, that would be the right thing to do. And after that tongue lashing by the Grand Jury, I'm sure the City is just quaking in it's [Gucci] boots about doing things the "right way"!  Seriously, does this go out to bid, or did the City accept a "demonstration project" from the vendor making the presentation? How long will the contract be? How easily can we get out of the contract? Is there a minimum payment if violations don't bring in "enough" revenue? Or do they just tighten the tolerance on what constitutes running the red light? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gatorback
|
|
« Reply #58 on: February 17, 2008, 03:27:41 PM » |
|
the more i think about this, the more angry i get.
so...the big question is. what is the penalty for NOT paying the "civil infraction" notice i get? what is City Hall going to do to me if i don't pay their fine? i am seriously considering intentionally trying to get one of these just to fight it in court. and i would only NOT pay the fine presumably because i would not be guilty....my friend from NYC would've borrowed my vehicle and ran the red light...not me.
they gonna levee my house? what if i rent and don't own? what can the city do? speaking of that...what if someone from mississippi runs the red light?
I'm scratching my head over this and perhaps I'm not for the cameras after all. Thoughts to ponder. It's that burden of proof...what if you and your friend switch drivers during the night. Let the cameras catch ya'll switching drivers...maybe 3 times...wear the same jeans, and hooded jacket...hahaha...there's no way of knowing who's driving if you both admit to driving....but were not sure when who was driving. Let them prove who's driving. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 17, 2008, 03:32:00 PM by gatorback »
|
Logged
|
'As a sinner I am truly conscious of having often offended my Creator and I beg him to forgive me, but as a Queen and Sovereign, I am aware of no fault or offence for which I have to render account to anyone here below.' Mary, queen of Scots to her jailer, Sir Amyas Paulet; October 1586
|
|
|
|
Lunican
|
|
« Reply #59 on: February 17, 2008, 03:39:57 PM » |
|
It doesn't matter who was driving. Just like a parking ticket, it goes to the owner of the car.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
facebook and 
twitter.
