Maryland Speed cameras

[archibaldcrane]

But if the owner somehow gets out of it, do you not think someone is still responsible?

Someone definitely is, and if the police or court can find out who that person is, then they should pursue them.

Even I'm not arguing this.

[Tyche]

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?

Without proof, no. I wouldn't view it any different than any other crime. If you're picked up for assault because you're wearing a blue shirt and a cap near the incident, it's not your responsibility to find the real perp if you're innocent. That would be absurd.

If someone downloaded an illegal movie off your internet, should you be responsible if the RIAA comes knocking at your door?

[NynJa]

Someone definitely is, and if the police or court can find out who that person is, then they should pursue them.

Even I'm not arguing this.

And while they have you in court, under oath, they ask one simple question:
"Then who was driving the vehicle"
from there they either get you to snitch, nail you for negligence (my car was stolen, but I didnt report it) and you're still responsible, or they nail you with perjury for lying under oath because you know who was driving.

no?

[Ashmada]

"Si ce n'est toi, c'est donc ton frère", Nynja?

[archibaldcrane]

And while they have you in court, under oath, they ask one simple question:
"Then who was driving the vehicle"
from there they either get you to snitch, nail you for negligence (my car was stolen, but I didnt report it) and you're still responsible, or they nail you with perjury for lying under oath because you know who was driving.

no?

"I do not know who was driving the vehicle, I was not there."

[Gregorio]

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.

You quoted Judai a few pages ago in response to red light face cameras saying:

wut

they aren't enforced in many places because they are determined to be unconstitutional, just like I'm arguing the maryland cameras are.

You just want the system to work and don't care if it passes constitutional muster. I get that, it's just not the way things work.

Maybe you missed the post he quoted and it being about face cameras, but that's where this line of questioning came from.


And now we're back to the part where I think you have to identify the driver of the vehicle to get out of the ticket (especially since the face cameras are not 100%), and you think they should get off completely free by trading cars with your neighbor when you plan on flying through school zones.

[Tyche]

And while they have you in court, under oath, they ask one simple question:
"Then who was driving the vehicle"
from there they either get you to snitch, nail you for negligence (my car was stolen, but I didnt report it) and you're still responsible, or they nail you with perjury for lying under oath because you know who was driving.

no?

Which is all fine if it comes to that point and can prove you are perjuring yourself. They shouldn't issue you the ticket on top of those charges though.

[NynJa]

"Si ce n'est toi, c'est donc ton frère", Nynja?

J'en ai pas de frere, et ma soeur habite au Alberta.

[archibaldcrane]

I think the court should ticket the driver of the vehicle for speeding.

So weird being forever alone on this.

[NynJa]

Which is all fine if it comes to that point and can prove you are perjuring yourself. They shouldn't issue you the ticket on top of those charges though.

In the second situation, where your car was stolen but you neglected to report it...you arent responsible?

[Gregorio]

"I do not know who was driving the vehicle, I was not there."

And that's not reasonable. Wouldn't the first thing any normal person do when they get a ticket is go to who was driving their car at the time and say something along the lines of "what the fuck man... pay for this ticket idiot, and don't ask to borrow my car any more". And if they say "I wasn't driving!", then you say "well who the hell was?! why would you let someone else drive my car??", and they either tell you or don't, then you go to the police for unauthorized use and they go to jail and you get out of the ticket. The end.

[Tyche]

For speeding, no. For failure to report, yes.

There is precedence here with hit and run accidents.

[Ashmada]

Oh. I thought your title was accurate ("au" Alberta?), you'd have gotten the reference in that case. Uncanny that you gave the same answer as the proverbial lamb, though.

Edit: Heh, just gonna copy-paste the english translation:

The strongest is always right.
We will prove it shortly
A Lamb was quenching it's thirst
In a clear stream;
A starving Wolf suddently appears, looking for a meal,
Brought here by hunger.
"How dare you foul my water hole?
Said the Wolf full of righteous fury:
-You will be chastised for you temerity.
-Sire, replies the Lamb, Your Majesty
Need not be angry;
But rather consider
That I am drinking
More than twenty feet
Downstream from him;
Therefore in no way
Could I spoil his water.
-Oh, yes you do, growled the cruel beast;
And I heard that you spoke ill of me last year.
-How could I, if I were not yet born?
The Lamb persisted, I am still nursing.
If it were not you, then it must have been your brother.
-I don't have any. -Then it was one of your lot;
Because you are always pestering me,
You, your shepherds and your dogs.
So I have been told: I must avenge myself."
With that, deep in the forest,
The Wolf carried off the Lamb, and ate it,
Without any other form of trial ("without further ado" was a stretching it).

[archibaldcrane]

And that's not reasonable. Wouldn't the first thing any normal person do when they get a ticket is go to who was driving their car at the time and say something along the lines of "what the fuck man... pay for this ticket idiot, and don't ask to borrow my car any more". And if they say "I wasn't driving!", then you say "well who the hell was?! why would you let someone else drive my car??", and they either tell you or don't, then you go to the police for unauthorized use and they go to jail and you get out of the ticket. The end.

wait, who goes to jail in this situation?

[archibaldcrane]

Just saying, under oath, you'd better be damn sure of what you're saying. It's pretty hard to ask you about material details of an incident when you are quite literally miles and miles away.

[Gregorio]

wait, who goes to jail in this situation?

You could probably call the police on the person who was actually driving because they were not authorized to be driving the car. It's not exactly stolen, but it is an unauthorized use. I forget the actual MD statute and I don't have my bigass book of vehicle laws with me right now.

[archibaldcrane]

You could probably call the police on the person who was actually driving because they were not authorized to be driving the car. It's not exactly stolen, but it is an unauthorized use. I forget the actual MD statute and I don't have my bigass book of vehicle laws with me right now.

But I thought you said you didn't know who was driving?

[Gregorio]

Just saying, under oath, you'd better be damn sure of what you're saying. It's pretty hard to ask you about material details of an incident when you are quite literally miles and miles away.

You tell the truth to the best of your knowledge...if you tell them something that you believe to be true but turns out not to be they're not going to punish you. I wish that were the case...nail badguys on the stand by asking them complicated math questions and forcing them to answer. Wrong answer? Goin jail for perjury.

But come on man, who lends their car to a friend of a friend of a friend without the owners knowledge and then doesn't own up and pay the ticket? These situations don't happen. Innocent people are not being ticketed if they actually put up the defense they are supposed to.

[NynJa]

You really dont read anyones posts, do you?

And that's not reasonable. Wouldn't the first thing any normal person do when they get a ticket is go to who was driving their car at the time and say something along the lines of "what the fuck man... pay for this ticket idiot, and don't ask to borrow my car any more". And if they say "I wasn't driving!", then you say "well who the hell was?! why would you let someone else drive my car??", and they either tell you or don't, then you go to the police for unauthorized use and they go to jail and you get out of the ticket. The end.

[Gregorio]

But I thought you said you didn't know who was driving?

If it's an unauthorized use there would be a police investigation. We're getting off topic.