Got a notice in the mail today, about a traffic camera violation in Miami. I was really not happy about it, and a bit worried about telling the wife that I got the notice. Then I noticed the date of the violation. November 27th. Heck, I was up in North Florida that day. Hmmmm
So I called the wife at work. She is down there, I am up here. I told her I got the notice of violation, and let her give her self righteous spiel. Then I told her about me being up here on that date. Dead silence. lol
That made my week.

Bastid

You'll pay...

Not much can be added to that.

If I did get the ticket I sure as hell wouldn’t put up with the ol’ dog and pony show....

Can't believe any American citizens put up with traffic cameras.

Little known fact but if you got the citation and it wasn't you driving the car, you don't have to pay and they can't make you. They also cant make you disclose who was driving. At least that's how the law works here.

I'll call my attorney to see how the law works in Miami. It's a world apart down there.

That's my understanding too.

Make 'em prove it.

T hey had them in Rochester up here,and they were like 2million in arrears from people not paying,then they did away with them,because the mayor and council decided the cameras weren't fair to the poor folk.

Worked for my buddies while elk hunting in Arizona. One rented a car at the airport..the other drove. First bud got a ticket along with a pretty picture (suitable for framing!) of them driving with buddy #2 at the wheel. Buddy #1 called up AZ and said "that ain't me behind the wheel!". AZ asked for a drivers license pic as proof, to which he scanned and emailed. End of story! Basically was told "Sorry 'bout that" from AZ.

They installed them in Palm Coast and they were making a killing until someone brought it to the FL Supreme Court. They took them all down.

Link to that story

Another Article on that subject

Yep, its their responsibility to establish who's driving, not the owner's responsibility.

Of course, everyone realizes that the traffic cameras exist solely for the purpose of making the road safer and not for the revenue that they generate, right?

They took some down here because they made the roads more dangerous. It was well-known which traffic lights had them and people were slamming on their brakes when tbe light turned yellow to avoid a ticket, and then getting rear-ended.

So which of her boyfriends was driving your car?

Of course. Its all for our own good....uhhh.....and the children.....never forget the children!

I'd willing pay double if my wife would just get a ticket. She's been pulled over a couple times but gotten by with verbal warnings. I know several LEO's and we've discussed it, but none were willing.

My wife was visiting family in Germany over the summer and got a ticket with her picture in the mail.

I see her writing out a check to the Bundespolizei and I said, what are you doing? You think they are going to send Interpol after you?

Yup, Sleep with one eye open Sam.

The city tried to implement that kind of system here and the whole community bitched about it and the city never went through with it. I don't know how accurate this is but there were some studies out there showing that in some places, traffic accidents went up after implementing the cameras because people were looking at the cameras instead of driving correctly. Once that information leaked out, it was pretty hard for the city counsel to argue the merits, even if it is a cash cow for the city.

Town put them in here several years ago. Pain in the a*&.......after several years people started asking where the money was and they could not find it. Cameras were gone shortly thereafter. Money still hasn't been found.....wonder where it went?

“I” got one of those several years ago because the vehicle was in my name even though it was my wife’s. I went to court and told the judge I was work at that time and wasn’t driving. He tried to get me to admit that my wife was driving it and therefore I would still be responsible but I knew their Bullchit gimmick and told him that being under oath demanded that I tell the truth and the truth is I WAS NOT driving and that I didn’t physically see the person that was driving it that morning. He asked me if I had asked my wife if she was driving and I told him NOPE and that I didn’t even mention the ticket to her. The judge asked me why I hadn’t questioned my wife about it and I told him that it’s not my job to help them make their case. I then read the statute (ordinance) to him and told him that unless he could prove otherwise he was wasting my time and the courts’ time. He was not happy with me and scowled, I laughed at his frustration which made him even more perturbed. He told me that I should have more knowledge about who is using my vehicle and I asked him if that was a legal obligation or his personal advice. He didn’t like being backed into a corner without a leg to stand on but had to dismiss the case due to their lack of evidence. I put my hat on immediately, turned my back after he ruled but before he was done admonishing me about my lack of “awareness” and walked out of the courtroom ignoring him and everything he was blabbering on about. He wasn’t happy about my lack of “respect” but I didn’t giveashit, especially since I have no respect for the cops and courts in that crooked jurisdiction. I’d be the first to stop and help someone in trouble but in that area I’d gladly watch’em bleed out before I’d offer any one of those dirtbags bandaid. Traffic cameras and the system built around it are nothing more than government sanctioned extortion.

They had about 20 of them around here. Someone sued and the ruling was they could only have them if a cop were stationed at each one while in use. Defeats the whole purpose, Don't have 'em any more.

One feller over in Santa Fe was caught shooting the camera car. They got a real nice picture of him aiming a large pistol, while wearing pajamas.

I chuckled.

One fellow in Phoenix is in prison for shooting and killing the man in the camera car.

Did your wife mention how devious you are?......

In Colorado a traffic camera ticket is unenforceable unless a cop actually contacts you and serves the ticket. All my trucks are in the name of a trust and the address is our family attorney--I'm immune............

Love it!


Well I'm for photo enforcement of traffic violations.....BUT since it is DemocRATS who seem to be the ones
who are installing this crap.... I believe it should only APPLY TO DEMOC-RATS.....

same thing for the new tax cuts being proposed and the DemocRATS are having a meltdown....
so I think Tax cuts should apply to Republicans and Independents.....

and that can be offset by raising taxes for DemocRATs.. that should make them all the more happy with
Chuckles Schumer....


and when Hitlery Clinton was saying she couldn't believe how low the taxes were on her and Bill's income, and
the amount for rich people should be raised.... I guess someone was holding a gun to her head, threatening
her and Bill and blocking them sending in more money to soothe their guilt of taxes being too low...

We have those automatic cameras recording traffic at intersections here in town... I always stop and flip them the bird
for a few minutes while sitting at the light....just to let them know the community support they are getting...

Got “flashed” last Wed. Waiting to see if a ticket shows up in the mail.

I’ll have to inform them the vehicle is driven by multiple folks and I can’t confirm who it was.

If you were driving, it'll come with a nicè photo of you behind the wheel.

A friend of mine was sitting in a doctor's office while his wife was being examined. Meanwhile he was getting a ticket issued for speeding in a nearby city. He sent multiple letters saying that he wasn't there at that time (after he got the ticket in the mail) and they were totally ignored.

He went to court, listened to a company representative (that issued the ticket) expound in court for 30 minutes about how they never made mistakes, and pleaded "Not guilty". The judge had him look at the photos that were in court and he did and said "That's not my car and I don't know who the driver is". The photos were of a car type that he didn't own with a license plate that wasn't his and some unidentified driver.

He got stuck with "court costs".

They’re welcome to pursue it. I have time.

Past experience tells me they won’t.

I got one a couple years ago for my son's car for avoiding a toll downstate. He drives a Toyota Camry, the offender was driving a minivan. Plus, we were in Florida at the time. When we blew up the grainy picture of the license plate it wasn't even mine. We protested and sent in all the info but they made it darn near impossible to contact the agency that sent us the ticket. They must have dropped it as we haven't heard anything in a couple years.

No doubt, they just count on people sending in the check.

Dang seafire, I used to wonder who pissed in your Wheaties all the time.

Now I think you piss in your own Wheaties.

Damn, you'd think a traffic court judge of all people would know that it's the driver who's responsible for a traffic violation, not the owner of the vehicle.

one of the quirks of the system here, is a process server had to give proof of service of the ticket. That's assuming they can find you. Particularly if you have numerous addresses. has to be done within 90 days too.
course if you are riding a gold wing with a helmet and full dark face shield, at 90 going through one of those traps kind of hard to identify you.
Had a friend that had a bmw m/c he would get on the freeway at night. he would take his plate off, full helmet and dark visor, and blow through a half dozen of them at around 130mph. gave him the giggles.
we did have one guy they finally caught to make an example out of. he was dressing up as bugs bunny. caught a bunch of times on radar.
they finally staked out the subdivision and caught him leaving for work.
one of the local issues they had was the ticket had to be issued to a live person. If car registered in corporate or llc name, couldn't write the citation. I was about ready to pay the 50bucks to register all vehicles in a llc when they pulled them out.

years ago when i worked LA they installed cameras in Pasadena . the folks there tried to get the city council to pull them. no dice.
then the wife of the head of the council intercepted a pic of hubby with a nappy headed gal hanging on him.
the cameras got pulled the next week. council president got divorced .

OHHHH, yeah.... BIG time...

Don't acknowledge receipt of that mail.

Yep! Might be a costly bit of satisfaction!

In our town the camera co and police were trying to bypass the court system. They had special
tickets printed that said not to contact the court house on when to appear before the judge.
Most people paid the $400.00 tickets without their day in court. These were completely
illegal tickets. Everyone can have their day in court.

I'm going to break my long time "lurker" status and reply on this subject because I despise this whole computerised system of justice. The whole idea of paying the ticket with no opportunity to rebut the charge flies in the face of "innocent until proven guilty"; it is nothing but a shake down to increase the flow of money into the coffers of the already bloated local gov't. They assume you will just pay the ticket to avoid giving up a day's pay to jump through the hoops and put up with the treatment you'll recieve from the arrogant judges and a court system far more interested in fleecing you than proving guilt or innocence. It's infuriating.

Last year, a house guest drove me to the emergency room for a serious prostate problem. I was admitted and schedled for emergency surgery the following AM. The emergency room staff gave my clothes and personal possesions to my house guest, which included my wallet and car keys. One surgery led to another. Long and short, I was hospitalised for six days while my guest cleaned out my checking account, ran up all my credit cards and ruined my car. She also took five hand guns and about $20,000 in power and hand tools, was involved in two hit and runs and passed a school bus which is why I'm here posting this tale of woe in the first place.

I had to go to court about this ticket. When I appeared in court, after waiting for five hours for my turn (during which I was offred plea after plea to "avoid the hassel of a trial") I presented the court a signed, notorised statement that at the time and date of the ticket I was in the hospital and incapable of having driven the car. Police reports documenting the theft and fraud were presented... I was wasting my time.

The Judge was clearly irritated I was taking up his time. Insisted I show (more) proof I wasn't driving and present him with a written, notorised statement identifying the driver. Couldn't do it, wasn't there to know who was diving, could only prove it wasn't me. Not good enough. That Son of a Bitch kept me on the stand for over a hour while he tried to get me to admit guilt or identify the culprit. The Prosecuter finally request the charge be dropped in the face of the evidence I had presented. The Judge was clearly irritated but let me know in no uncertain terms how lucky I was to be getting off with only court costs. I still haven't paid them but no warrents have been issued. This sucks.

Merry Christmas! Back to lurking.

Elmwood Place, Ohio put in these speedtrap cameras a few years ago. I was going through there twice a day. As soon as I saw them go up, I slowed down to 15-20 MPH in the zone even though the speed limited was 25-35 MPH. When I drove past the cameras, I'd flip them the bird. In rush hour traffic, it probably caused a backup with me driving so slow, but nobody got any tickets while I was coming through.

Fast-forward 2 years: The courts said the cameras were unconstitutional. Not only did Elmwood Place have to remove them, but they' had to reimburse over a quarter-mil in fines.

Removed in my town also. To many people complained to city council.

I’ve had one, sucks

I'm not sure these camera ticket scams can pass constitutional muster. I'm another that got a red light ticket in the mail for a vehicle I had sold before the alleged violation occurred. What a mess to get straightened out.

Most common ones I see are at toll booths with fast pass. Run it without a fast pass, they bill you in the mail.

I didn't. Wasn't my wife, it was my son. All I had to tell them was "sorry, it wasn't me driving." End of story.

I got one of those camera tickets in the mail not too long ago. Lucky for me it was only a warning though.

I actually remembered going through that intersection because I was thinking that's a damn short yellow light , now I know why.

What is the best gauge/shot size or rifle for traffic cameras ?

Mike

Speed cameras and red light cameras are nothing more than a revenue generating scam by the government. Most of the people that travel those roads on a regular basis, know where they are. With the speed cameras, people just slow down for the camera and then speed back up when they're out of range. The only people they catch are unsuspecting drivers. They also have portable cameras that come and go, but they always put them in the same spots and are easy to see. In construction zones on major highways, they have cameras mounted to the front of an SUV and are parked behind the jersey walls that also come and go. They too are easy to pick out.

My wife is famous for telling me to slow down when she's riding with me. Paybacks are hell. Back in 2009, she got two tickets within a week of each other at two different cameras. 60 MPH in a 30 MPH zone. Now, every time she starts ragging on me, I always say, "OK Miss 60 MPH in a 30 zone." That'll shut her up for a while.

We had a case a few years ago where there was one of those SUV mounted cameras in a construction zone on I-95. A guy had parked in an adjacent parking lot near where the SUV was by the interstate. I guess there's no fence there. He slipped through the woods to where the camera was, and with a baseball bat, smashed out all of the windows in the Jeep and then disappeared. The perp was never caught and the guy in the Jeep was uninjured.

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know how it stands up in court. But the ticket is issued to the owner of the vehicle with a picture of the vehicle and then a close up of the tag. As far as I know, if you don't pay it, the state won't renew your tags. The first offense is $30.00, so it's not worth fighting.

Oh yea, I forgot to mention.................I've never got a speed or red light camera ticket. Knock on wood.

That's incorrect. All traffic offenses are committed by the driver, not the owner of the vehicle. It makes sense, right? If you loan your car to someone, you are not responsible for their traffic violations.

They will send you a photo of not only the license plate, but the face of the driver. If it's your face in the photo, most people will just pay the ticket. They can compare the photo to your DL.

If it's not your face in the photo, all you have to do is tell them it's not you. They cannot compel you to disclose the ID of the driver, that's not your responsibility, it's their responsibility. They have to establish that it was you driving, and they can't force you to do their job. Think about it.

I guess every municipality is different when it comes to the traffic cameras and their enforcement. I got a notice in the mail several years ago in an envelope with what looked like an official letter head from my county law enforcement. I thought it was something related to donations to frat order of police. After Schmitt canning 6 or 8 of them I finally opened it to find a ticket and fuzzy Xerox of a picture of a motorcycle on it going through a traffic signal light

It had a web link that you go to to check it out more. I never did open the link. I got several calls from a lawyer firm on the west coast about it. I suggested they send me the info by certified mail and they declined. They finally quit sending them. A county commissioner fought the cameras to no avail, he did run a time slot on TV that showed him set fire to a traffic ticket he had received and dropping it into a waste basket. It prompted our county commission to admit they were unenforceable but hope that folks would still do the right thing......

I understood that the parent corporation for the camera systems was located off shore. That's where the majority of the money goes. The municipality doesn't recoup enough of the money to make enforcement viable. Their main benefit is supposed reduction in accidents.

If they can get away with the traffic cams the next step will be using an automobile GPS to send out anonymous speeding tickets every time your car goes 40 in a 30 speed zone.......

Savor the moment you got one up on the wife, cause she will pay you back in spades.

Actually, in this state, they don't give you a picture of the driver. This is an example of what our tickets look like.



However, I do agree with you, ultimately the person driving the vehicle is at fault.

I found this website that defends the fact that this crap is unconstitutional and unfair. The worst part is that you are guilty until proven innocent.

http://www.mddriversalliance.org/p/arguments-against-speed-cameras.html


Ticket Recipients who challenge citations have their cases heard in an unfair court proceeding commonly known as District Court 'Speed Camera Day', where dozens of defendants have their cases heard in an assembly line manner. Because the burden of proof for speed camera tickets has been lowered below that of a criminal case, below that for even ordinary traffic violations, defendants are essentially 'guilty until proven innocent'. Judges have in some cases made statements to the effect that 'the only acceptable "not guilty" plea was if someone else had been driving their car at the time the ticket was issued, and to present that driver." At Speed Camera Day hearings the government is free to present evidence without supporting witnesses, something which would normally be a violation of the "Rules of Evidence". In some cases defendants are found guilty even when they have proven that required operating procedures were not followed. In many cases even when a defendant requests the "operator" of the camera to appear, in the manner described on the citations, judges have instructed that those operators need not testify, something which goes against several supreme court rulings on the spirit of the "Confrontation Clause" of the US constitution. Not only does this set a horrible legal precedent, and risk finding innocent people guilty, but it gives no incentive for the government agencies which are enforcing the law to obey the law themselves.

LOL!

This is nothing more than the same philosophy that "guns commit crimes".

Cars can't either.

But you'll sure get a ticket for it.