I knew about red light cameras, but.....

[C-bus]

Speed cameras? WTF? I just got a lovely letter in the mail with a picture of my vehicle going through a green light at 48 MPH in a 35 MPH zone. Did I miss something? I had no clue that these even existed. It was dated April 4th in Downtown Cleveland. $100. One step closer to that mountain cabin to write my manifesto.

[magley64]

Oh yeah, even easier than red light cameras. Back in 2011 they installed some in Ashtabula. Residents didn't like the idea, politicians insisted it was a safety measure, not a money grab, so we got a ballot initiative going and passed a law that stated: any automated speed or red light enforcement devices must be manned by a police officer at any time they are in use, enforcing the law.

Guess what happened less than a month after it passed... almost like magic, all of them disappeared.

Before they disappeared, I did get an opportunity to trip one with a bicycle, which was fun. It's apparently pretty common in Europe for hooligans to light these things on fire.

Edited June 18, 2014 by magley64

[speedytriple]

Yeah they are all over downtown i just passed on on chester last night. Gotta love cleveland

[CBBaron]

Speed cameras? WTF? I just got a lovely letter in the mail with a picture of my vehicle going through a green light at 48 MPH in a 35 MPH zone. Did I miss something? I had no clue that these even existed. It was dated April 4th in Downtown Cleveland. $100. One step closer to that mountain cabin to write my manifesto.

They have been there for years. I think all of the red light cameras can trip on speed but I know there are a number of speed cameras also. There are some of the mapping apps that will highlight these for you. 

Or office got a letter from Cuyahoga Heights announcing they would be using portable speed cameras in town. Most of the few roads in town are 25MPH so plently of people will be tagged.

 

Craig

[BadTrainDriver]

For a 48 in a 35 violation, you should feel lucky it was a camera and only a $100 fine.

Edited June 18, 2014 by BadTrainDriver

[C-bus]

Yeah they are all over downtown i just passed on on chester last night. Gotta love cleveland

Yep.... Fucking Chester on my way to a meeting at Cleveland Clinic.

[ScubaCinci]

They are money grabs, plain and simple. I know here in Cinci, there was a big lawsuit about the red light cameras and the courts forced them to take them down. Something about the accused are unable to face their accuser in court. Not sure how/if this applies to speed cameras.

[C-bus]

I'm not really against the idea of cameras watching traffic. I'm against the potential abuse of them. If you blow a red light, you should be ticketed. Period. If you drive 48 in a 35, you should be ticketed. Period.

It's the ability to abuse that information that I don't care for. Call me what you will, but I do not trust the government, in any capacity.

If I was going that speed, I earned it. I generally don't have a lead foot, but Chestee is 3 lanes in both directions and moved like a 45-50 zone. Of course it was nearly three months ago, so how do I even contest it.

[DAC]

I'm not really against the idea of cameras watching traffic. I'm against the potential abuse of them. If you blow a red light, you should be ticketed. Period. If you drive 48 in a 35, you should be ticketed. Period.

It's the ability to abuse that information that I don't care for. Call me what you will, but I do not trust the government, in any capacity.

 

Agree with all stated here except the "ability to abuse."  Only question is:  What kind of abuse do you expect?  This is open-air, visually observable, public data.  As always, there should be due process and the ability to appeal but stuff out in the open is, well, out in the open.

 

Everyone on the planet now has a smartphone with a video camera and soon there'll be openly available apps that can calculate speed and distance (probably already is.)  There are security cameras everywhere that can be subpoenaed by the government.  That's how they caught the Boston Marathon bombers.

 

I now see at least one red light run every day.  Not "burnt orange."  Flat out red.  Yesterday I saw a guy on a bicycle almost get tomato-sauced in a crosswalk.  The problem isn't the government - it's us.  Our laws are, generally speaking, designed around voluntary compliance.  Otherwise, there would be a cop at every intersection and everyone would get audited by the IRS every year.  Now though, there is a general mind set that the laws apply to everyone else.  Not me.  I'm in a hurry!  Busy, busy, busy!

[OsuMj]

If I was going that speed, I earned it. I generally don't have a lead foot, but Chestee is 3 lanes in both directions and moved like a 45-50 zone. Of course it was nearly three months ago, so how do I even contest it.

Does the picture clearly show you are the driver of the vehicle?

[redkow97]

They're currently being challenged in a district court (I think) in Toledo.  I haven't read the brief, but my understanding is that they're challenging the trial process.

 

The municipalities avoid that pesky "innocent until proven guilty" thing by making them civil fines, and any "trial" happens in front of some kind of police tribunal (or some crap like that).  Basically the lawsuit says that it's a violation of due process to not hold the hearings in front of a Judge.  

 

If they win that, there's no way the court will waste its time on these, and they will almost surely go away completely.  And frankly, I don't even mind the money grab aspect - I mind that the CAMERA COMPANIES get a lot of the money, and the city gets almost nothing.  Law enforcement isn't supposed to be for private profit...

[Josh1234]

it's been proven that the number of accidents goes way up after red light or speed cameras are installed....  Because drivers tend to slam on their brakes at the first sign of yellow, which makes the person behind then rear-end them, of course.

[Tonik]

Does the picture clearly show you are the driver of the vehicle?

 

Doesn't have to. They are specially worded civil infractions so the owner of the vehicle has to pay no matter what. It is quite the scam.  Ohio Supreme court heard arguments on the whole thing last week and will rule soon. If that fails the State Legislature is most certainly going to make them illegal by the end of the year.

[JackFlash]

it's been proven that the number of accidents goes way up after

red light or speed cameras are installed....  Because drivers tend

to slam on their brakes at the first sign of yellow, which makes the

person behind then rear-end them, of course.

 

Cities have also been known to reduce the amount of time

a light is yellow, for the purpose of generating more red light

runners and collecting more money.  That also causes more

rear enders.

 

There is a law in place that states how long a light must remain

yellow.  Somebody look it up and post it.  Chillicothe was caught

cheating people with shorter yellow lights and their city counsel

knew it was happening, but failed to fix it.  They are definately

out to extract as much from your pocket as they can get by with.

 

Here is some of their information.

http://www.shortyellowlights.com/ChillicotheRLCStudy.pdf

 

.

Edited June 18, 2014 by JackFlash

[redkow97]

The good old U.$. of A.

[whaler]

You do realize attorneys are the scumbags that profit from our legal system, right?

+1 !!!!!!!!!

[redkow97]

You do realize attorneys are the scumbags that profit from our legal system, right?

 

Maybe on the civil side of things.  Criminal law is a volume business.  For every 1 Jimmy Haslam paying his attorneys a quarter million a year, there are 10,000 Joe Drug-Addicts who are either getting counsel appointed, or failing to pay their retained counsel the $1200 they owe them. 

 

DUI defense is probably the one area of criminal law where there's a decent profit margin, and rich white folks are dumb enough to over-pay routinely. 

[Tpoppa]

And frankly, I don't even mind the money grab aspect - I mind that the CAMERA COMPANIES get a lot of the money, and the city gets almost nothing.  Law enforcement isn't supposed to be for private profit...

 

Last I read, the cameras operating in Cleveland were run by a company from another state, I believe it was N Carolina.  The breakdown was something like 70% went to the camera company, and the rest went to city.

 

So the city gets 30% for doing nothing.  They know they will get voted away eventually, but the longer the trial takes the more free money they get.  It's a cash grab that filters money out of the local economy.

 

The other thing I've seen is the language on some ballots to get rid of these cameras was intentionally written to be confusing..."Vote YES if you don't want the cameras to not be removed," or something like that

[DAC]

So, the cameras are bad because they outsourced their operation?

[Tpoppa]

So, the cameras are bad because they outsourced their operation?

 

I think the cameras do a great job of filtering money out of people's pockets, and creating a ticket that side steps due process

I think the safety claims only occur in the sales meeting between the camera company and the local jurisdiction...you know just before they get into the real conversation about revenue. 

[DAC]

So make the locals post up signs - "speed camera in use" - well before the camera placement. I agree that the idea should be safety, not revenue. If the limit is unreasonably slow, then you'll get public pressure to have 'em post a higher limit.

Edited June 18, 2014 by DAC

[Tpoppa]

^^^

or better yet, make the locals remove them entirely.

[DAC]

lol. Sure. No problem there.

Edited June 18, 2014 by DAC

[ohiomike]

"The Ohio House voted 11 months ago for a bill that would ban municipalities from using red-light and speed cameras except for limited use in school zones. But with concerns that the bill could violate constitutionally protected “home rule,” Sen. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, crafted an alternative that would allow use of the cameras only when a police officer is present at the intersection."  http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/05/28/cities-fight-to-save-red-light-cameras.html

 

Seems I read the latter- " allow use of the cameras only when a police officer is present at the intersection." passed into law not too long ago.  It was also said that cameras were going to come down because it was not feasible to put a Leo at every camera site.

[Josh1234]

So make the locals post up signs - "speed camera in use" - well before the camera placement. I agree that the idea should be safety, not revenue. If the limit is unreasonably slow, then you'll get public pressure to have 'em post a higher limit.

 

It's required (around here at least) that the neighborhood has signs that say "automated traffic enforcement."

 

And even before the speed cameras, there ARE signs up.  People just miss them.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Josh1234