guilty until proven innocent????

[slipnslide087]

becareful in the US. i fell a victim to a new freedom that was taken away by our govt. got a letter in the mail that says i have a court date for running a red light. they havea pic of my car going under a red light. then under it, it said "the light has been red for 0.2 seconds." fucking bullshit. theres no way they can prove i was driving my car. pinned on me bc a fucking camera at the red light? sorry USA, but thats not being innocent until proven guilty....and i think tahts something are country is supposed to be based on. HA im fighting in it court though. fuck paying $100 thats bullshit. and i want the courts to hear my 2 cents.

[az666]

good on ya. lol. although im not sure............about anything

[Rarrr]

we have red light cameras here in australia, big revenue raisers... fuck them all!!!

[FRANKFRANKFRANK]

FIGHT THE FUCKING POWER, MAN!

[Cannabis.com]

Red light cameras are just a continuation of the erosion of the natural rights of all Americans.

Most states already can require drivers to submit to a breathalizer test upon request - if the driver refuses, they can lose their license and can even jailed ... some states even allow the person to *physically* forced to give a sample - be it breath, urine, or more often blood.

And it makes NO difference if the person is actually drunk or not - a driver is, in layman's terms, assumed guilty; the poster of this thread hit the title right on :(

How can that be possible ... the govt uses the logic that driving is a privilege - when I was younger, I too bought into that logic ... however, such logic is faulty because if driving is a privilege, then is biking, walking, etc too? ... all of those activities are often done on public streets too.

For folks who buys into the driving is a privilege logic, go to a rural area and see how long one can go without a car; many employers will not hire people who don't have car transportation.

More fundamentally, simply living in a house, etc can be considered a privilege - the government has eminent domain over *all* property (any property "owner" who doesn't think so - see what happens when you don't pay your taxes - yep, say bye bye to your property; an illusion anyways, since the govt owns all land) ... so in essance, merely living in a house, etc could be considered a privilege ...

Point is that if "privilege" is all it takes for the govt to justify assuming one is guilty until show otherwise, the collective basic natural human rights of Americans is already long gone ...

The reality of Kings and Peasants is still as real now as it ever was ... really digressed in this post - point is that ultimately, one has to be aware of their rights and *publicly* defend them like slipnslide087 is going to do by fighting that ticket - wish you the best :)

A few tips when challenging the ticket ...

* Challenging who is driving is likely *NOT* the best approach for various reasons ... ie. they could easily challenge you by asking "If that's not you, then who is it?" ... "Really, you don't know them?" "Did you file a stolen car report with the police?" etc...

* Google around and see what other folks have used to challenge such tickets.

* Research the laws in your state - was the red light camera properly certified?, is it properly installed/aimed?, -is the yellow light timing too short?, -is the camera properly syncronized; perhaps the camera took the picture when the light was only yellow?

* Was the light green when you entered the intersection? -if so, then it doesn't matter if you went through the red light or not ... a car already in an intersection may continue through; clear the intersection.

* Were you driving straight through ... or were you turning? This relates to above - ie. if you were making a left-hand turn, then going through on red should not be surprising since one often has to wait for opposing traffic to clear.

None of this is legal advice of any kind, but I hope it's helpful nevertheless ... and again I wish you the best :)

Ron

p.s. let us know what eventually happens.

[Buck268]

I'm pissed so I'll make it short (Pissed cuz my car is STILL in the fucking garage on fucking jackstands instead of out cruising around tonight like it should be)

THe US is not the same country that was created by the Revolutionary War, nor is it the country who ratified the Constitution, nor the country that settled the entire North American continent. We, as a country, are but a shell, a psuedoAmerican country. And it makes me fucking sick. Nobody values freedom anymore, these Neo Con's have made sure of that! The terrorists will get you unless you allow us to proect you! Yup, and we need them too also, since they have taken away (or tried to) our best means of defense, firearms. You mean there is actually a reason for every American to own an assault rifle? HELL YES. Its called National Security. If we were still an armed nation, do you think 9/11 would have happened? Not a chance, those box cutter weilding towelheads would have been shot to pieces. And the same goes for any other terrorist act.

But come on now, guns are evil, right? :rolleyes:

This country is reaping the seeds sowed by the flower children of the 60's. Congrats.

[RESiNATE]

Some excellent points there, Ron :)
(you should visit the UK :rolleyes:..we have loads of them!!!)

In the UK, though, any Traffic Safety Devices (a posh term that the government uses for 'revenue raisers') have to have at least 100mtrs prior notification of their position - ie, they have to warn drivers that a speed-tracking device is ahead.
The law also stipulates that these cameras have to be 'in plain sight' (ie, not hidden behind a bush), and have to have reflective yellow cases.

Obviously, this is UK law and I don't know how things stand in the US...but might be worth looking into ;)

The RAC (a motorist body) recently investigated the effectivness of these so-called traffic safety devices, and concluded that their implimentation bore no evidence of a reduction in road traffic accidents...but had helped to generate millions of £s in revenue.

And does this revenue go towards improving road surfaces, school crossing safety, or better road markings?

Does it fuck!
It goes into the pockets of the government - as does all taxes :mad:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/effects.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3731585.stm

"Example... Essex County: for 2003 they had a massive increase in Speed Cameras: issuing 94,537 Fines: which netted them £5,672,220. And the Result? in 2002 there were 92 Fatalities: in 2003 there were 116 Fatalities: a rise of 25%. An unbiased conclusion might be that the Cameras were making no noticeable difference: and it was all a waste of Time and Money. The Authority's Conclusion? the County obviously needs more Speed Cameras! Strange how any decrease is due to Speed Cameras: but any increase is nothing to do with Speed Cameras!" - http://www.roadsupervisors.net/aej.speed.htm

Sorry...I'm a professional driver, and it's a pet hate!

The bottom line is this:
You SHOULD be aware of what is going on in front of you - whether that be the colour of the lights, or if the road surface is wet, etc etc etc
Speed doesn't kill - ineffectual drivers do!

However, if less time was spent looking out for these fucking cameras, then more attention could be spent on actually driving in a safe manner.
Every sensible person... is in favour of safer roads: but we are now in the 21st Century so it is about time the Authorities packed in their patronising lectures and put some effort into developing a Plan which is a little most sophisticated than some of the garbage they are peddling at the moment. You cannot develop a higher standard of driving for a whole country by simply Punishing people in ever greater numbers: their strategies are ill-conceived: simplistic: and unworthy of public support.

All power to you, slipnslide, i hope it goes well for you - remember, ignorance isnt a defense ;)...that's what the lawyers will tell you, not me being an asshole :D

[qwerty]

so then go faster so they cant see your liscense plate only a blurr

[RESiNATE]

lmao...they can detect speed up to 160mph (as far as I know), so unless you have something akin to a fucking formula one racing car, then you're pretty much nabbed, init :D:D:D:D

Just do what everyone else does...slam the brakes on!!
Then watch as 20 or 30 cars pile into your boot (trunk)...good safety device, eh? :rolleyes:

[fatty lumps]

I don't understand. What freedom, exactly, was taken away? You knew there was a red light camera there (if you didn't you should pay more attention), and you blew through it when it was either red, or in the process of turning red. You knew what was gonna happen.

Just be happy you don't get demerits (only because, like you say, they can't prove it was you).

out.

[slipnslide087]

first off, im guilty unless i can prove myself innocent. secondly...in the pic you can tell that i am far enough under the light i didnt see it turn red. it was red for .2 seconds.....thats fucking nothing. i pay more attention to my driving than looking for red light cameras and what not...and just bc i know a light doesnt ahve a camera wont make me feel welcome to blow thru the light even if its a fresh red one. this is going to be a fine and a couple points or wahtever on my license. they cant prove its me, but gues what....i cant prove it wasnt me really so im guilty! it would just be my word against the cameras. they dont have any indication of anyhting about the driver. if they want to really prove shit maybe they should make the cameras so you can see the driver also. i could bullshit them so easy about someone else driving....sisters friends anyone man. i think im going to take the approach of making them prove it was me. when i went to the court date and told them i was going to fight it, i got another court date....but its not for a while, b/c apparently a lot of ppl are fighting it and winning it. shouldnt be a rough battle. i think they mostly agree you win if you recognize the fact that the govt just fucked you. most ppl wouldnt think twice and just pay it. i cant afford points on my licnese so im not having it. will keep you guys informed. peace.

[ermitonto]

That's the way the system works. If ignoring a couple rules is going to help the government get its way, you can bet your ass it will happen, especially with little things like this that the public will probably never know about.

Little by little the government is establishing universal surveillance everywhere, from little things like red light cameras to huge international networks like Echelon, and it pisses me off that the majority of the population just accepts the status quo and doesn't mind that soon they'll be Big Brother's loyal minions.

[Cannabis.com]

An easy work-around, at least in areas that often experience poor weather, is to obscure the license plate with mud, etc so the picture doesn't come out.

If an officer sees a dirty plate, they'll likely just tell the driver to clean it off - this works best for folks who only have one license plate on their car; some places only require a license plate on the back of the car, such as in Pennsylvania where I live - in fact, many folks there have novelty license plates or the dealership plates on the front of their cars.

On an aside, the polarizing plastic shields sold on the T.V., etc do NOT work - most all cameras can see right through them crystal clear.

Old tech sometimes works wonders - so in a nutshell, muddy up the plate, tint the windows, and drive freely like the police do :P

Ron

p.s. some folks donate to their local Police fraternal organization to get the little round badge to stick on the license plate so as to avoid "problems" ... some claim it works ... for frequent drivers, it may be worth shelling out $20 or whatever for it.

p.s.s. anyone from P.A. know why so many folks, often driving black sporty cars, have D.A.R.E. license plates? Is it just a style thing or do they think the police will ignore them if they blow past at 80 in a 55... anyways, enough rambling on for now.

[RESiNATE]

If an officer sees a dirty plate, they'll likely just tell the driver to clean it off -
In the UK, the officer would be obliged to issue the driver with a £30 fine, plus a 3-points endorsement on their license (contravention of 'construction & use laws') - plus, it gives them an excuse to pull you over...not a good thing, generally speaking, even in respect of convenience.

In the UK, the police are NOT allowed to pull a driver over without due cause - ie, they have to have a reason...I always try to minimise the 'reasons' ;) - lights and tyres are in good order, sensible driving patterns, etc, negate the 'reason' for a cop to pull me over.
Most of the speed-limits (a ridiculous notion, there is no such thing as a speed limit) in this country are a joke - wide open country roads with a 'speed-limit' of 50mph!..sheesh, I usually drive a fully freighted artic at full-pelt (56mph restricted by limiter) without causing any danger what-so-ever.

As to traffic light cameras.
In the UK, our traffic lights have 5 stages:
1: RED - means STOP
2: RED and AMBER - means STOP, but prepare to go
3: GREEN - means GO (if the way is clear)
4: AMBER - means prepare to STOP (if it is safe to do so)
5: RED - means STOP
If you went past the line, just as the lights turned RED (bearing in mind that the AMBER light has given you a 2second warning of the imminent RED - at 30mph, you can travel 60ft), then it could be conceived by law that you were demonstrating a lack of awareness, or were travelling at a speed that didn't allow enough stopping distance - a difficult situation to find yourself in - the conviction would come under the banner of "driving without due care and attention".

Remember, the law works on the basis of "what if...", as much as it does to "what is..."
(especially when it comes to motoring laws)

The UK motorist is seen as a 'cash-cow', we are the most heavily taxed body in the country, and have so many laws governing us as to treat us like criminals before the act - it's a sad fact.
I think I'm right in saying that the motorist fraternity contribute over £400Billion per year in revenue to the UK treasury.
They just want to bleed us dry, and use such tactics as 'global warming' and 'environmental degradation' as their propoganda tools.
Most cars these days run cleaner than ever before, and contribute very little towards global warming.
They are also increasingly made of bio-degradable materials.

oops, I'm in danger of going off on a tandem here, so I'd better leave it there.........for now bwhahahaha:D
Res...

[slipnslide087]

i also think its fucked up that they dont stop building cars to fuck up in a number of years just to keep the car industry in business. Bush also just decided he needed like what 80bil more dollars, so now hes taking it out of lockheed......hes stopping all F22 fighter projects now. There is one other jet hes is stopping the production of also. So basically hes cutting a bunch of people out of jobs so he has more money for defense or whatever. Or he could just stop spending $400 million dollars every year helping car companies make advertisements. Oh yeah, and also gasoline. They could make a tank of gas last us cross country. 200 miles a gallon or so i think. they do it for the military??? is there some reason we cant use that?? FUCK YOU BUSH AND HIS SUPPORTERS. AND FUCK EVERYONE DUMBASS WHO VOTED FOR HIM. HOPEFULLY MAYBE AFTER 4 MORE YEARS OF THIS BULLSHIT YOU WILL SEE WHAT A FUCKING IDIOT YOU ARE. peace. let me know if you voted for bush. peace.