• joyjoy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some cities have been sued for doing that. You can’t face your accuser in court if your accuser is a computer.

      • Serdan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That doesn’t sound right. The accuser is the state regardless, no?

        • braxy29@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          what if your family member or friend was using your car? what if your car was stolen? also, some of those cameras will ticket for legal right on red.

          they just catch plates and send a ticket in the mail to the registered owner. it’s not great. source - i live in a city with these, though state law now means the city can no longer enforce tickets. also, the idea of camera/computer generated rosters of law-breakers is unsettling.

          • Serdan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If your car was reported stolen, then you document that and get the ticket canceled. I don’t see how the presence of a police officer changes anything about that.

            I don’t have a problem with the owner getting a ticket if someone else was driving. I also, again, don’t see how that’s relevant. It’s not like the police officer is going to remember who was in the car.

            The camera ticketing for something legal is a technical issue that should be fixed.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sort of, the idea is that you can face the citing officer in court. Granted, all the officer has to do is lie and the judge is likely to side with them over a rando citizen, but that’s the intent of the law.

          • Serdan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t understand why that’s important. The officer is just a biological camera. They’re there to document what you did wrong.

    • SpaceBar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Red light cameras, sure. It can be done fairly - not that it is everywhere.

      Speed cameras just trap people new to an area. The people who live in an area learn to avoid them and thus they don’t stop habitual speeders who are a danger. Plus they can’t be everywhere.

      The bias needs to be taken out of it. Police can’t seem to stop themselves from racial profiling. Its like a compulsion.

      • RavenFellBlade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I used to drive truck over the road, and I can attest to the fact that those red light cameras can also be made very deliberately unfair. The city of Hannibal, Missouri had these cameras at the intersection of Highway 61 and Red Devil, at the bottom of a steep hill. About 1/5 of a mile up the hill south of the intersection was a pole with a sensor on it set to about 12’6". I observed that any time any vehicle over that height passed that sensor, the light would trip to red. And it was set at a distance that a loaded semi would be all but guaranteed to run that light. Those of us who traveled that corridor with any frequency knew the sensor was there, and would try to want other drivers over the CB, but a lot of drivers had stopped routinely using the CB by then, so the light proved quite lucrative. At least, until it started causing wrecks from the trucks jackknifing in the intersection in the winter. That setup ran for three or four years before the city was dragged into court over it and forced to remove the red light cameras, though it was done in such a way as to question the enforceability of the tickets and without ever directly acknowledging that the cameras were set up to entrap commercial vehicles.

      • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gridlock cameras can be added to red light cameras, also reducing congestion policing costs.

        Speed cameras trap people new to an area.

        Or they could just, not speed? And speed cameras can be everywhere. They cost up to $50k to deploy and collect to 2k+ fines per year (based in my location, this obviously varies wildly), so they run net positive. Rotating locations can also get after the habits of locals, though that’s the 50k cost, I’d guess statics are cheaper.

        If immediate reduction is most important than habit changing over time (i.e. a school zone or highway transition) speed linked red lights can achieve the effect. Such to say, if you drive over the limit, the light turns red. This forces you to stop and pisses off everyone behind you, providing social pressure. These are only in the pilot stage, so I don’t know the real deployment costs.

        • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Speed traps are called speed traps because the limit suddenly drops like 20-30 mph in a very short distance. Saying “just don’t speed” completely ignores how speed traps work and why they exist .

          • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just realised this is a US politics forum, my insights my not be useful.

            Speed cameras in my region require at least one warming sign and a sign on the camera itself, yet they still catch people (myself included…)

            The short distance limit dropping sounds like a failure in road design if cars aren’t naturally lowering speeds due to the changing streetscape.

            Regardless, the point of enforcement (and the rules they informed) should be based on keeping roads safe, not “trapping” people. I’m sorry you have to go through that.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But I want to drive 65 in a 30 zone! It’s a conspiracy by the deep state agenda 21 liberal fascist police to prevent me from doing that!

          /S

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Here in L.I it definitely is not done fairly. 9/10 times the cameras are only in low income neighborhoods… It’s disgusting.