- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Man turns camera ticket into constitutional trial of the century
Posted on 1/24/17 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 1/24/17 at 1:57 pm
quote:
My story begins with a confession: I got a traffic-camera ticket. An affidavit signed by a Montgomery City police officer, it averred that I had committed a particular traffic violation on a certain date, at a certain time and location. It showed a photograph of one of our family vehicles. It charged me with a “civil violation” of “criminal law.”
quote:
Traffic-camera laws seem like such minor, insignificant intrusions on liberty that few grasp their constitutional significance. But they reflect a profoundly mistaken view of American constitutionalism. One might say that the traffic camera is a sign of our times. Its widespread use and acceptance reveals how far we have drifted from our fundamental commitment to self-government. When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.
LINK
17
Posted on 1/24/17 at 1:58 pm to boxcarbarney
probably a woman driver.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:01 pm to boxcarbarney
That's what is so great about the Constitution. It's like the Bible in that it's content can be spun to fit just about any argument that you have.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:01 pm to boxcarbarney
frick those cameras with a passion
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:02 pm to High C
He's got a point.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:03 pm to StealthCalais11
They claim cameras are about public safety.
But when camera revenues drop to the point where they are no longer profitable the cameras magically disappear.
But when camera revenues drop to the point where they are no longer profitable the cameras magically disappear.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:03 pm to High C
Nevermind. Probably read that wrong.
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:05 pm to High C
quote:
That's what is so great about the Constitution. It's like the Bible in that it's content can be spun to fit just about any argument that you have.
I've long held that camera tickets are CLEARLY unconstitutional and if someone/enough people took the time and money to fight it all the way, the high courts would agree.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:06 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I've long held that camera tickets are CLEARLY unconstitutional and if someone/enough people took the time and money to fight it all the way, the high courts would agree.
100%.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:07 pm to Fun Bunch
I have 8 or so unpaid speeding tickets from the belle chase speed van.
Every time they call I ask them why they're calling from Arizona or wherever, and that i didnt realize Belle Chase PD relocated their HQ to another state.
The they threaten my credit etc. I just laugh and hang up.
Every time they call I ask them why they're calling from Arizona or wherever, and that i didnt realize Belle Chase PD relocated their HQ to another state.
The they threaten my credit etc. I just laugh and hang up.
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 2:09 pm
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:07 pm to boxcarbarney
That's awesome.
Camera tickets are complete B.S.
Camera tickets are complete B.S.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:08 pm to Fun Bunch
What few studies there are that i have seem have shown taraffic stop cameras actually increase accidents, its about revenue
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:08 pm to boxcarbarney
quote:
She asserted that I had violated the “rules of the road” and explained, “you were caught on camera speeding.” I asked her for any evidence. She replied that she did not need evidence. I was deemed liable because an automobile that I own “was caught speeding.” But the complaint is against me, I noted, not my car. But I am liable, she insisted, because I loaned my vehicle to “someone who speeds.”
THIS! I have argued this many times. If I lend my car to someone and they are caught speeding, by an actual cop, am I ticketed? If I lend my car to someone and they get drunk, am I given a DWI/OWI? But because a camera sees my vehicle speeding or running thru a red light, the laws change.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:09 pm to boxcarbarney
They implemented the traffic violation camera in college station, we voted that unlawful shite out. 
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:09 pm to boxcarbarney
Is this like that episode of Big Bang Theory when Sheldon uses Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment when he goes to traffic court because of a camera?
And because I brought that up, here ya go.
And because I brought that up, here ya go.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:12 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
THIS! I have argued this many times. If I lend my car to someone and they are caught speeding, by an actual cop, am I ticketed? If I lend my car to someone and they get drunk, am I given a DWI/OWI? But because a camera sees my vehicle speeding or running thru a red light, the laws change.
Most of the camera tickets allow you to challenge that it wasn't you driving, but you must fill in the blanks who WAS driving your vehicle and their information.
They try to get around Constitutional law by claiming it as a civil offense instead of a criminal one.
It clearly violates due process. bullshite.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:14 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I've long held that camera tickets are CLEARLY unconstitutional and if someone/enough people took the time and money to fight it all the way, the high courts would agree.
I agree. It is absolutely ridiculous for local government to argue that this is anywhere close to legal and constitutional. They know it, too. Some places (Boston, if I recall) have started slapping a fee on people who want to contest the tickets. The fee is more than the ticket, so even if you win your challenge, you still end up paying more than you would have if you just paid the ticket (not counting insurance premium hikes, points on your license, etc.). Obviously, this is just an attempt to discourage people from challenging a practice that is patently unconstitutional.
That said, on the list of unconstitutional things government gets away with, this is pretty low. Civil forfeiture is orders of magnitude worse. Refusing to provide effective assistance of counsel to criminal defendants and imposing ridiculous limits on discovery even for those who do get effective representation are also worse than traffic cameras, in my view.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:14 pm to Boudreaux35
quote:
If I lend my car to someone and they get drunk, am I given a DWI/OWI?
that's the way the japs do it.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:15 pm to High C
Are you suggesting that traffic cameras are anti-Christian? That seems a bit hyperbolic.
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 2:16 pm
Posted on 1/24/17 at 2:17 pm to CP3
Belle Chasse has a speed van? Maybe you mean the City of Gretna one often on Hwy 23? There is presently a class action suit against the City of Gretna over it.
Municipalities have tried to end run around the Constitutional issues by classifying it as a public safety "civil" offense similar to a parking ticket. (But the fines are significantly higher than parking fines.) Sort of like Edwin Edwards convincing the LA legislature that the prohibition against gambling in the state constitution does not apply to "gaming" as they chose to define it.
Municipalities have tried to end run around the Constitutional issues by classifying it as a public safety "civil" offense similar to a parking ticket. (But the fines are significantly higher than parking fines.) Sort of like Edwin Edwards convincing the LA legislature that the prohibition against gambling in the state constitution does not apply to "gaming" as they chose to define it.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News