Anyone ever (successfully...) disputed a red light camera ticket?

Its simple, look before you cross the road. As a former child I knew that from a young age. The fact is if the road is completely empty just having a rolling stop is not going hurt anyone. By the way coming to a complete stop and then going is a lot worse than having a rolling stop. Static friction is greater than dynamic friction. And having the number cars as we do it adds up to a lot of energy loss.

 

I don't argue the legitimacy of the law, but I do dispute outsourcing poilce work to out of state companies that send law enforcement their quotas for the month.

and I also dispute the effectiveness.

most people get caught in that split decision moment between slamming on the brakes and going through the light.

the camera doesn't capture every scenario/situation around the intersection, only the moment the vehicle passes through the radar/camera...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question

 

Same applies to cars. Stop and look before you go into the intersection. When it's a 1-ton car that is a killing machine, you better make sure there's no one there. A rolling stop won't give you as good a judgment as a complete stop.

 

You should contest that. Traffic rules say that if any part of your car is in the intersection when the light changes you can still legally, and are supposed to, clear out of the intersection as it is more dangerous for you to try to stop in the intersection. I got pulled over one time by a cop who said I turned left on a red light and I pointed out to him that I was already in the intersection and turned as soon as the traffic from the other direction allowed me to. That happened to be right when the light turned red. He let me go without even a warning.

 

<br>
Thanks for the lecture, brah...
<br>
See the problem is, I do that anyways. In my dad's case, he did too, but apparently the stop wasn't deemed "long enough" for the camera. My mom made it past the light before it turned red but apparently that wasn't good enough for the camera either.

I wasn't referring to common traffic laws being lame, rather all the bs red light cams. They contribute nothing to helping public safety or enforcing any laws. They are just there to make the county money. There is plenty of lameness to it.

 

People b**** when cops sit around waiting to give out traffic tickets (instead of fighting crime).....then they b**** when cameras do it which frees cops from having to sit in that area.

 

I have had three red light tickets and have not paid all three. Two were for turning right on red when cross traffic left turn light was green so I did not stop(same intersection near my house). The other was for actually running a red light. Do not know what happened but just signed it and sent it to the issuer and never heard from them again. I did get pulled over after these tickets for not signaling while changing lanes but the officer let me go so I guess they are not on my record either. never got a notice or anything that the tickets were dismissed.

 

The camera may not be effective, but the OP and many here aren't arguing about that. If she had truly made a full stop and the camera still gave her the ticket, then yeah there should be b!tching. But speaking from personal experience, vast majority of drivers at least in Houston tend to do a rolling right on red.

And the whole split decision between slamming on brakes and going through should not be a decision in the first place. The only time I get caught in such decisions is when I'm in a hurry and traveling well above the speed limit. When I drive like a wuss, following every rule in the book because there's an elderly or a kid in the car, I never run into such problems. These rules only seem pesky because we're in the habit of breaking them.

 

I (luckily) haven't got a camera ticket, but I did get a ticket for turning right at a red and not turning into the far right lane. I had to get to the median to make a left, so when I turned I went all the way to the left, which was 1 lane from the right. When the cop pulled me over I told him that I do that quite often since I have to turn at the median there to get home, he said he appreciated my honest, but he didn't care and obviously had to meet his quota....

Pugs

 

A better question is how much does the company handling these fines take off the top...

And the answer is...21%.

So, in summary...a traffic violation can now be manufactured by a third-party company through (documented) alteration of yellow light timing, netting that third-party 21% of a fine. Said third-party can put people in collections for non-payment (maybe not, I still am not sure about this). Third-party is also lobbying for government action as retaliation for non-payment of debt. It's a good thing there's so much oversight with these cameras and this company, otherwise they might abuse their power.

 

The only fact is that your fact is an opinion. I knew the difference since I was a child.

The law is not subjected to each and everyones own personal interpretation. Perhaps your opinion maybe that rolling stops wont hurt anyone. My opinion might be that running all stops signs never hurt anyone. Your opinion does not override the law, regardless on how you reason.

 

Yes the law is subject to interpetation, that is why we have jury trials.

Maybe the USA should do what they do in the UK, which is post warning markers about any upcomming camera trap.


DD

 

Good for you. I am glad you do. I wish everyone would. Regardless, my statement stands on its own merits.

 

We don't have jury trials because the law is open to interpretation. The job of the jury is to decide questions of fact. The interpretation of the law is the job of the judge.

However, there really is very little room for interpretation when the law says you must stop at a red light before turning right. The law is never subject to the type of interpretation Air Langhi was applying (and Space Ghost was criticizing in the post you quoted), i.e. "we don't have to follow the law if we determine that breaking it will not hurt anyone."

 

Are jury trials even an option for a traffic ticket?

 

Sure are:

And SFR, I disagree, a Jury interpets the law all the time and it can render a verdict based upon their interpetation.

Tons of times they take the law into their own hands, and do not rule based upon the letter of the law.

And, that is exactly what the forefathers intended.

DD

 

Where do you live, sir? "Camera Enforced" signs are posted at least 100 ft. before every RED LIGHT CAMERA traffic intersection. Do you not see those??? Also, it's not a trap, when you're warned.

 

Austin, we don't have camera traps as far as I know...

DD

 

I hate that crap. The roads intersect at an angle so you have to pull up far enough to peak past other cars that obstruct your view. I just paid my fine for that very intersection.