Maryland Speed cameras

[hey]

Youre standing infront of two people, one is holding a red ball, and one is holding a blue ball (lol)...you're struck in the head by a ball, you turn around and see the blue ball at your feet, and the red ball is on the floor infront of the two people behind you. Who threw it? Or are you just ignore it...

The person you just witnessed holding a blue ball.

[archibaldcrane]

millionth time: parking ticket which is nearly the exact same way these tickets are classified

in parking ticket situations you can make arguments that the signage was wrong, that the ticket was issued in error, that it isn't your vehicle, etc. etc.

Speed camera tickets you can't argue that the radar was wrong, that you couldn't possibly have been the driver, etc. etc. - the only acceptable defense is handing over someone else.

So no, it's even worse than parking tickets.

[archibaldcrane]

Who threw it? Or are you just ignore it...

If you can't prove who threw it, you ignore it.

[NynJa]

The person you just witnessed holding a blue ball.

But you cant prove it, you didnt see them throw it...even though you saw them holding a blue ball (even though you were caught speeding and your license plate is visible), you cant prove they threw it.

If you can't prove who threw it, you ignore it.

you're going to wind up with a concussion then if you keep letting people whip shit at your head like that ...

[Ashmada]

Something is already prosecuted, the car committed the crime (speeding). Obviously a car can not speed on its own, and someone must be responsible for operating said vehicle. If no one can be found to be in the vehicle, then the owner of said vehicle is ultimately responsible. Surely someone with a law background would have a better method of explanation. As was said a couple times before, I'm pretty sure if no one wants to pay the fine, a judge could probably have the car impounded.

Cars, like corporations before them, are now people, too!

[archibaldcrane]

Also depends on how bouncy these balls are

this is a really confusing scenario you're drawing

are we supposed to assume you got hit with the blue ball or the red ball

perhaps a diagram is in order

[archibaldcrane]

But you cant prove it, you didnt see them throw it...even though you saw them holding a blue ball (even though you were caught speeding and your license plate is visible), you cant prove they threw it.

this analogy is terrible

the problem with the speed cameras is that noone saw who was driving

[Gregorio]

Do you think that the situation I presented (clear evidence that you could not have possibly been driving the car when the photo was taken) should be sufficient for having the fine dismissed or not? If that doesn't cut it, then continuing this discussion is meaningless.

Nynja thinks that unless you hand over the driver you should have to pay, even if you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt it wasn't you.

Dismissed? No. Is that what you're changing your argument to now? I thought you were all about innocent people not getting the fine? Who needs a documentary proving you were in the Himalayas when you could just say "my friend Jimmy was driving it, here's his address". And you were ALL FOR face cameras for 95% of the thread, now you're mysteriously ignoring it (7th time ignored). Your support of parking tickets was based on the fact that it was not reasonable for parking enforcement to determine the driver while it was perfectly reasonable for FACE CAMERAS to identify the driver. Should we eliminate parking tickets now too because if you were in the Himalayas with 100% proof that you were there?

And you can argue that the radar is wrong, but they're just going to say "no it isn't, ___ says it was calibrated and I believe him over you".

[Tyche]

Something is already prosecuted, the car committed the crime (speeding). Obviously a car can not speed on its own, and someone must be responsible for operating said vehicle. If no one can be found to be in the vehicle, then the owner of said vehicle is ultimately responsible. Surely someone with a law background would have a better method of explanation. As was said a couple times before, I'm pretty sure if no one wants to pay the fine, a judge could probably have the car impounded.

Youre standing infront of two people, one is holding a red ball, and one is holding a blue ball (lol)...you're struck in the head by a ball, you turn around and see the blue ball at your feet, and the red ball is on the floor infront of the two people behind you. Who threw it? Or are you just ignore it...

Actually, you're speaking to someone with a law background! Saying the ticket is against the car is a fallacy however. It's a ticket against the registered owner. If you get a ticket and sell the car before it's due date, the ticket doesn't transfer to the new owner.

[archibaldcrane]

Face cameras are nice because then you don't have to prove you were in the fucking himalayas, the camera will show it's not you. I'm ignoring it because we're 23 pages deep and I've said time and time again that face cameras would prevent innocent people from getting tickets, which is what I want.

So even if you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you weren't the driver, you should still have to pay the ticket.

That's fucking retarded.

[Gregorio]

in parking ticket situations you can make arguments that the signage was wrong, that the ticket was issued in error, that it isn't your vehicle, etc. etc.

How can you argue that the vehicle that you own and that's registered to you is not your car? The evil twin with the same name/address defense?

[Fhloston]

All you guys get are photos? In TX, back when we had those goddamn speed cameras, you would get a letter with a link to a photo plus HD vid of your offense. So glad they turned those off!

[NynJa]

I wonder how many cars on the road right now are NOT being operated by their owner, or by someone that the owner does not know is actively driving it.

[archibaldcrane]

How can you argue that the vehicle that you own and that's registered to you is not your car? The evil twin with the same name/address defense?

You could've sold it but the paperwork you mailed to the DMV hadn't been processed yet, for one example.

But, if you don't allow such defenses, then the truth will never come out.

[greenhills]

Thing is: scamera are resilient buggers.
Once they settle somewhere, you can't remove them.

Reason doesn't work: scameras (and scamera tamers) don't care about the presumption of innocence or due process, all they care about is gorging themselves on delicious €/$ bills.

Force doesn't work. Not even fire can stop them. Sure, you might kill an individual scamera, but another one will replace it soon enough; if not a pair for Hydra blood courses their veins. For the first time in the history of mankind, we encounter a threat that cannot be killed with fire!


And soon enough, they'll get hungrier and hungrier; soon, they'll ask for treats, such as:
- Serial widespread speed reductions: "This road used to be safe at 90 (kmh), but now, with your newfangled safer cars, it's only safe at 70. I predict it'll only be safe at 50 in 3 years".

- Lingering temporary roadworks limitations: before scamera: 30 (kmh) in roadworks, for as long as work last, maybe a couple of days more.
After scamera: the limitation lingers weeks, sometimes months after the work is done. Drivers assume the sign doesn't apply anymore (since the motive for its presence is gone); but it does and the scamera feasts.

- Others I forget.

Sorry, Archi, but Maryland is doomed, just like our ol' Europe before it. This is a menace one can't combat, only endure.

how is anyone still arguing about this after this post? also the mention that it is just profiteering off of speeding tickets?

[Ashmada]

All you guys get are photos? In TX, back when we had those goddamn speed cameras, you would get a letter with a link to a photo plus HD vid of your offense. So glad they turned those off!

Wait. The monstrosities have been vanquished by hillbillies? We know how to kill them? Tell the world, spread the word! How'd you guys do it?

[archibaldcrane]

I wonder how many cars on the road right now are NOT being operated by their owner

I'd guess right now, 5%?

Probably more. I mean, I didn't start driving a car that I owned until 2003, yet I've been driving since 1996 - so 7 years driving a car I didn't own and 9 years driving a car I did.

[archibaldcrane]

how is anyone still arguing about this after this post? also the mention that it is just profiteering off of speeding tickets?

i dunno bro, some people clearly don't recognize sheer brilliance when they see it

i even tried to do the /thread thing

[NynJa]

Actually, you're speaking to someone with a law background! Saying the ticket is against the car is a fallacy however. It's a ticket against the registered owner. If you get a ticket and sell the car before it's due date, the ticket doesn't transfer to the new owner.

Then what are you saying? lol, I'm having problems replying to this because I'm understanding it to be in agreement with me. I know its against the registered owner, and theyre finding ways to prove that it shouldnt go to the owner. But if the owner somehow gets out of it, do you not think someone is still responsible?

[NynJa]

I'd guess right now, 5%?

Answer the entire thing...not a portion of it.

I wonder how many cars on the road right now are NOT being operated by their owner, or by someone that the owner does not know is actively driving it.

Unless you're saying that 1 in 20 cars on the road are not being driven by their owner, or by someone that the owner knows is behind the wheel.