Maryland Speed cameras

[Tyche]

You're either dumb or intentionally ignoring reality if you think speed cameras aren't a deterrent to people driving excessive speeds.

Also all that bs about speed cameras being unconstitutional because traffic courts don't use a presumption of innocence or a reasonable doubt standard is hokum because driving on public roads is a privilege, not a constitutionally granted right.

If you can lawfully be encouraged to throw money at something and continue to violate the law, it's not preventative. Unless there some stipulation that you can only acquire so many of these tickets before something more serious happens, in which case, it would still be broken.

[archibaldcrane]

Also all that bs about speed cameras being unconstitutional because traffic courts don't use a presumption of innocence or a reasonable doubt standard is hokum because driving on public roads is a privilege, not a constitutionally granted right.

Courts are saying "fuck you" to legislators and police departments about pursuing these tickets due to constitutional concerns. Obviously shit is interpreted differently depending on the court, but that is what it is. The constitution doesn't fly out the window just because the violation is on a roadway. These tickets don't affect your driving privileges anyway.

[aurik]

Courts go both ways on it. Ultimately it'll be found to be legitimate, because it is in the public interest.

[aurik]

If you can lawfully be encouraged to throw money at something and continue to violate the law, it's not preventative. Unless there some stipulation that you can only acquire so many of these tickets before something more serious happens, in which case, it would still be broken.

bout the stupidest thing i've read today. grats.

In other news, token library fines aren't there to dissuade people from keeping books past due, the 10c per day is to generate revenue.

[archibaldcrane]

Courts go both ways on it. Ultimately it'll be found to be legitimate, because it is in the public interest.

I think that since they are clearly designed to produce revenue primarily, they are not.

The Supreme Court will likely never rule, so we won't get to "ultimately".

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S 4G using Tapatalk

[aurik]

Right, the legislators will keep tuning the laws until the courts stop rejecting them.

[Tyche]

bout the stupidest thing i've read today. grats.

In other news, token library fines aren't there to dissuade people from keeping books past due, the 10c per day is to generate revenue.

Library fines are an excellent correlation! What if you save money by speeding? What if you can justify the monetary amount and continue to put people's lives at risk? That's what I mean by its not preventative. If you have the money, if you ball so hard, there's no incentive to follow the rules. You don't think that's broken?

[Zeb]

Wow, anyone arguing archi and Tyche need to gtfo.

3 people share an apartment. You are one of them. You have a registered gun stored properly in a gun safe in your room. Your neighbor is shot dead. The police arrest/try/convict you of murder because they checked the neighbors of the victims for gun owners and you came up in the system. Sucks to be you, because now you're charged with murder. The cops didn't even question your roommates, because it's YOUR gun and YOUR responsibility. It's up to you and/or your lawyer to investigate from there to find the real murderer and prove your own innocence. Good luck getting reparations from the state for a wrongful conviction.

/It was your roommate's drug addicted friend who always snoops through everyone's rooms stealing change and shit.

[NynJa]

Why do you let a drug addict who goes through everyones shit stealing stuff in your apartment to begin with...

[Zeb]

Why do you let a drug addict who goes through everyones shit stealing stuff in your apartment to begin with...

maybe you should ask your roommates that, but have fun trying to get a hold of them while you're in jail.

[aurik]

Wow, anyone arguing archi and Tyche need to gtfo.

3 people share an apartment. You are one of them. You have a registered gun stored properly in a gun safe in your room. Your neighbor is shot dead. The police arrest/try/convict you of murder because they checked the neighbors of the victims for gun owners and you came up in the system. Sucks to be you, because now you're charged with murder. The cops didn't even question your roommates, because it's YOUR gun and YOUR responsibility. It's up to you and/or your lawyer to investigate from there to find the real murderer and prove your own innocence. Good luck getting reparations from the state for a wrongful conviction.

/It was your roommate's drug addicted friend who always snoops through everyone's rooms stealing change and shit.

nope, you're an idiot, go away.

[aurik]

Library fines are an excellent correlation! What if you save money by speeding? What if you can justify the monetary amount and continue to put people's lives at risk? That's what I mean by its not preventative. If you have the money, if you ball so hard, there's no incentive to follow the rules. You don't think that's broken?

Sure, but money has always bought forgiveness since before the pope invented indulgences.

[NynJa]

maybe you should ask your roommates that, but have fun trying to get a hold of them while you're in jail.

Because you're really comparing the trial procedures of a murder trial to a 40$ speeding violation.

[Salodin]

Why does the law change depending on who/what is issuing the citation? An officer wouldn't issue a speeding ticket to the owner sitting in the back seat.

Another /thread here. Again, the ticket should go to the person driving, regardless of who is the owner. If they make no effort to determine who that is, with something as simple as already-available face cameras, then fuck it.

Because you're really comparing the trial procedures of a murder trial to a 40$ speeding violation.

Because you're really trying to say it's better that we just make no effort to determine the actual driver of the person speeding in the car.

[Ashmada]

all this shows is you're looking for bullshit copout answers to get out of paying the ticket. what would that judge say if you said "i was not the person who parked the car there" because that's essentially what you're arguing is enough information to get out of the ticket. prove you were the one who was not driving or the one who parked the car. If you can prove that it wasn't your car then you would surely be able to get out of the ticket (this was one of the defenses you used to get out of the parking ticket)

I would completely agree with you if this was regarding points on a record or criminal charges but it's a liability fine, you're responsible for the property that was found guilty with said evidence of the violation so you are responsible. If someone dumped some crazy ass shit on my lawn you think my HOA gives a fuck that I wasn't the one that put a bunch of trash on my lawn? nope they still hold me responsible to clean that shit up and under the terms of my HOA I believe could fine me if I did nothing about it.

In most cases like yours you probably drove your mommys car and your mommy is going to know you're the one who was driving and make your ass pay for it. Your rebuttal to answering the posed question about husband/wife/brother/sister/mother/father/son/daughter etc was unrealistic, it makes no sense to spend the man hours figuring out every close relative to a person who owns the vehicle it's much more unrealistic than just having that person get the money for the fine themselves for loaning the car to them. We going to call the F.B.I. for every damn speeding/red light ticket to figure out who this person is? We aren't talking about someone being convicted of murder we're talking about $40 fines.

All this shows is that you absolutely want someone (anyone) to be punished for the oh-so outrageous crime of driving at speeds exceeding what the government deems safe.

That's not how free society works.
Free society works under some principles like presumption of innocence, free speech,...

But there's a trend of (of?) finding exceptions to those principles when they're incovenient, replacing them by their much less meaningful cousins: presumed innocent unless the crime is profitable to the state; freedom of non-offending speech,...

The trend isn't new, but it's sure growing faster than ever before (see: SOPA and the like; "we can't enforce copyright online while upholding presumption of innocence, saveguarding free speech and respecting privacy, so fuck all that shit") and speed cameras are sure symptomatic of it.

Presumption of innocence implies that you'd rather let the guilty go unpunished than punish the innocent, regardless of the impracticality/impossibilty of proving culpability, punishement or nature of the crime.
If speed cameras can't prove culpability beyond reasonable doubt, then they're not a valid tool of law enforcement.
But since they bring in the cash, they're there to stay.


Damn you for making me restate that in a less humoristic fashion than the first time.

[aurik]

So many people arguing disingenuous arguments because they mad they get charged for breaking the speed limit.

[aurik]

Also anyone who says presumption of innocence at this point has willfully ignored the FACT that driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right.

When you get your car licensed, and your drivers license, you are essentially entering into a contract where you agree to pay all fines incurred by the car. Don't like it? Build your own damn roads.

[Salodin]

Also anyone who says presumption of innocence at this point has willfully ignored the FACT that driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right.

When you get your car licensed, and your drivers license, you are essentially entering into a contract where you agree to pay all fines incurred by the car. Don't like it? Build your own damn roads.

Yes, because being given the privilege of driving on public roads allows the courts to deny you basic rights guaranteed in this country for over 200 years.

Also, apparently there are no situations where I am not responsible for the damages cause by my vehicle. Mmk.

[Ashmada]

Are you sure you want to set the precedent of invalidating presumption of innocence just by arbitrarily declaring something "a privilege"? Really?

(btw, I haven't personally been caught yet, but nice ad hominem nonetheless)

[Tweek]

Wow, anyone arguing archi and Tyche need to gtfo.

3 people share an apartment. You are one of them. You have a registered gun stored properly in a gun safe in your room. Your neighbor is shot dead. The police arrest/try/convict you of murder because they checked the neighbors of the victims for gun owners and you came up in the system. Sucks to be you, because now you're charged with murder. The cops didn't even question your roommates, because it's YOUR gun and YOUR responsibility. It's up to you and/or your lawyer to investigate from there to find the real murderer and prove your own innocence. Good luck getting reparations from the state for a wrongful conviction.

/It was your roommate's drug addicted friend who always snoops through everyone's rooms stealing change and shit.

take this example you gave.. remove the gun from"safe" storage, put the gun in the hands of a minor committing the crime, now who is responsible? same thing, your gun, your responsiblity, who is liable?