Red light cameras

[PatriotLover]

How long will Americans stand for big brother taking our rights away. We should be up in arms over this but too many of us are acting like docile sheep.

 

[Saint Peter]

Just pay your ticket and stop being a pussy about it.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

How long will Americans stand for big brother taking our rights away. We should be up in arms over this but too many of us are acting like docile sheep.

STFU It was over 5 minutes after the British surrendered at Yorktown.

 

[PatriotLover]

Just pay your ticket and stop being a pussy about it.

Not even the issue. I don't run red lights, because I don't drive a car. I refuse to surrender my rights in order to drive.

The point is that your privacy is invaded, & you don't get to face your accuser in court.

 

[phrodeau]

Stage a boycott then.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

How long will Americans stand for big brother taking our rights away. We should be up in arms over this but too many of us are acting like docile sheep.

Since when is it a right to run stop lights? Or to drive at all for that matter.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Not even the issue. I don't run red lights, because I don't drive a car. I refuse to surrender my rights in order to drive.

The point is that your privacy is invaded, & you don't get to face your accuser in court.

If you don't drive then why do you give a shit?

Sure you do, there's a picture with your face behind the wheel driving through a red light usually attached to the ticket.

 

[Saint Peter]

Not even the issue. I don't run red lights, because I don't drive a car. I refuse to surrender my rights in order to drive.

The point is that your privacy is invaded, & you don't get to face your accuser in court.

The camera flashes when you run red light. In Colorado, because there is no police officer issuing the ticket, you pay the fine and no points are assessed. It is a monetary hand slap and has nothing to do with privacy.

 

[PatriotLover]

Since when is it a right to run stop lights? Or to drive at all for that matter.

I don't recall saying it was.

We have a right to privacy & we have a right to face our accuser in court.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Presumably we don't want people ignoring all red lights and flouting the law, even the patriots among us, but on the other hand we also want a little leeway in the system, a little slippage. This is one of the main things people hate about the total surveillance society.

Anyway, in the case of traffic laws and red light cams, what's happening now is that we're in an interregnum where the state of technology is advanced enough to constantly keep an eye on drivers, but not quite advanced enough to move to a completely automated traffic control network which would obviate the problem by taking the decision out of the driver's hands. The two technologies are closely related--one is really an aspect of the other.

 

[PatriotLover]

The camera flashes when you run red light. In Colorado, because there is no police officer issuing the ticket, you pay the fine and no points are assessed. It is a monetary hand slap and has nothing to do with privacy.

Your privacy is violated when red light & traffic cameras record & store the movements of private citizens.

 

[planetqueen]

I don't recall saying it was.

We have a right to privacy & we have a right to face our accuser in court.

I envy you your life if this is something that you can get riled up about.

 

[PatriotLover]

Presumably we don't want people ignoring all red lights and flouting the law, even the patriots among us, but on the other hand we also want a little leeway in the system, a little slippage. This is one of the main things people hate about the total surveillance society.

Anyway, in the case of traffic laws and red light cams, what's happening now is that we're in an interregnum where the state of technology is advanced enough to constantly keep an eye on drivers, but not quite advanced enough to move to a completely automated traffic control network which would obviate the problem by taking the decision out of the driver's hands. The two technologies are closely related--one is really an aspect of the other.

An even scarier concept. One where a private citizen says, "I want to go down that street", and the government says, "you can't".

 

[PatriotLover]

I envy you your life if this is something that you can get riled up about.

I pity you that you don't take the rights people have fought & died for seriously. Rights citizens in other countries are denied.

 

[Saint Peter]

Your privacy is violated when red light & traffic cameras record & store the movements of private citizens.

I do not agree. My privacy is voluntarily put on hold when I am driving my car on the public street.

If I have a big case of the ass about this I am free to buy my own land, build my own street, and cover it with a big tent so that nobody can view me driving.

 

[RobDownSouth]

If you don't drive then why do you give a shit?

Sure you do, there's a picture with your face behind the wheel driving through a red light usually attached to the ticket.

"Concern trolling" at its finest.

Sorta like when Medicare boy Vetteman sez he has no problem getting an appointment with his doctor, but "knows" others have problems getting appointments because of Obamacare.

 

[Sean]

Your privacy is violated when red light & traffic cameras record & store the movements of private citizens.

No, it isn't. I suggest you Google the phrase "reasonable expectation of privacy". You'll find it doesn't apply on a public road. But you hate the constitution so it doesn't surprise me you don't understand that.

 

[Squibbs]

Not even the issue. I don't run red lights, because I don't drive a car. I refuse to surrender my rights in order to drive.

The point is that your privacy is invaded, & you don't get to face your accuser in court.

Just because you can't afford to drive a car doesn't mean you have a right to complain.

 

[phrodeau]

An even scarier concept. One where a private citizen says, "I want to go down that street", and the government says, "you can't".

Scary!

Fascism!

 

[PatriotLover]

No, it isn't. I suggest you Google the phrase "reasonable expectation of privacy". You'll find it doesn't apply on a public road. But you hate the constitution so it doesn't surprise me you don't understand that.

That doesn't mean the government can track a person's movements and store them forever.

It's not just me saying this is an invasion of privacy.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/technolog...se-plate-readers-just-dont-keep-data-innocent

 

[Sean]

That doesn't mean the government can track a person's movements and store them forever.

It's not just me saying this is an invasion of privacy.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/technolog...se-plate-readers-just-dont-keep-data-innocent

Actually, yeah, it does. Just as a private citizen can't be sued for recording you on the street, neither can the government. This is basic stuff.

 

[koalabear]

That doesn't mean the government can track a person's movements and store them forever.

It's not just me saying this is an invasion of privacy.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/technolog...se-plate-readers-just-dont-keep-data-innocent

When you use a ATM your pic is sent straight to NSA.

 

[PatriotLover]

Actually, yeah, it does. Just as a private citizen can't be sued for recording you on the street, neither can the government. This is basic stuff.

Now you're just being deliberately stubborn. I'm talking about two very separate issues. It's one thing to be in the background of someone's home video of the kids soccer game. It's quite another for the government to record every movement someone makes & store it forever.

 

[Sean]

Now you're just being deliberately stubborn. I'm talking about two very separate issues. It's one thing to be in the background of someone's home video of the kids soccer game. It's quite another for the government to record every movement someone makes & store it forever.

No, it isn't. Legally, it's exactly the same. You should really try and get some eduction on a topic before you start a rant, you just look dumb otherwise.

 

[ryan8558]

Not even the issue. I don't run red lights, because I don't drive a car. I refuse to surrender my rights in order to drive.

The point is that your privacy is invaded, & you don't get to face your accuser in court.

Sorry, you don't have a dog in this fight.

Better the red light cameras than a policeman. If a policeman writes the ticket it's counted as a moving violation, goes against your insurance and the fine and court costs are more than $75. The red light camera ticket is just a fine, $75 here, and does not go on your insurance.