Camera Enforcement Tools
Frank Borelli
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com
Have any of you seen the movie, “Demolition Man” starring Sylvester Stallone? It’s a wonderfully imaginative science-fiction movie in which every human being is tagged with a microchip embedded in their skin. If anyone commits a violation of law (such as violating the “morality statue” by cussing) their bank account is automatically debited a specified fine amount. In the movie, Stallone’s character refers to this as “fascist”. What scares me is that we may well indeed be on our way to such a system.
Maybe I’m just blowing things out of proportion, and that’s why I type this out - to solicit comment and input. I remember going through the police academy and then RADAR operator’s training and then LASER operator training… and it seems to me that every time I turned around I was being told about how many things I had to do just perfectly so and then how I had to testify against them just to get someone found guilty of speeding in court. Now I turn around and there are RADER and Red light cameras, automatically triggered, and it’s a whole different world.
I remember when Red light cameras first were being set up. I remember the conversations around the station at the agency I worked for at the time: it revolved around how much money could be made by putting them in. Very little discussion was had about whether or not they were legal; defendable; constitutional, etc. I was just as guilty as the next guy. All I could think about was how much our budget would go up if we had all the revenue these cameras were going to produce. At the time, my father was a district court judge and he spent several hours explaining to me how the cameras were legal under civil law. My quandary was in separating the civil infraction issued against a vehicle from the criminal citation issued to an individual.
With red light cameras I guess I didn’t have a lot of trouble. The camera snapped a number of pictures starting just before the light turned red and continued while the moving vehicle went past the white line or intersection barrier after the light was red. Somewhere, though, an imperfect human being had to look at those pictures and decide whether or not a violation had actually occurred. If so, then the letter with the fine amount was sent. If not, then the photos were set aside for records. Where I had a problem was the assumption of guilt based on the photo evidence, and the fact that rights of defense didn’t apply because it was a civil action, not criminal, therefore different rules applied.
Then along came speeding cameras. My understanding got worse. A camera which depends on a RADAR system to cite my speed takes photos and I get a letter for the infraction with a fine attached. Whether I was the driver or not, I’m held responsible for the violation committed in my vehicle (same as with red light cameras). So my best friend says to me, “Isn’t this like me driving your car with you in the passenger seat and when I get pulled over for speeding the cop writes YOU a ticket?” Um… well… yes… I mean no… I mean… it’s not criminal; it’s civil, so it’s okay. Huh?
Call me as confused as ever. I see the obvious strength of these enforcement tools. Once they become public knowledge then speeding and red light violations will be significantly reduced in their proximity.
I see the obvious revenue benefits to be had by a municipality, county or state (?) generated by these civil violations that bring with them a presumption of guilt and easily projectable fines.
On the other hand, I see my best friend’s point: how can I be held responsible for his actions? The car can’t commit a violation all on its own. It doesn’t drive itself. Now, the day my car drives itself through a red light I’ll more than happily pay the fine - and immediately sell the car. But in the meantime…
What do you all think about this? What about business, city, county, state or federally owned vehicles? Who should pay those fines? With these camera enforcement tools there are a lot of assumptions that get made, against which we have no protections under the law. How do you all feel about that?
I’m looking for all comments, both pro and con.
To wrap my head around it, I think the premise is that as the registered owner it is your responsibility. You should lend your car to someone who speeds or runs lights. Just like the owner of a gun can be at fault if they loan a weapon to some they know could use it commit crime. As for the fact that the person who is driving doesn’t get hit with a fine, well I guess that’s an issue between the owner and the driver to settle. Though I would guess it would make for a rather easy to settle small claims action if you’re to type to sue a friend.
There will always be a debate over any law (civil or criminal) that is put in the books. As far as this is concerned. I have let one other person other than myself drive my car, my wife. I am not in the habit of letting every Tom, Dick, and Harry drive my vehicle. If I were to get one of this tickets, I can easily track down who received the ticket if it wasn’t me and recoup. the money, which will be my money anyway. If it is totally civil, then no points will be assessed to my record and therefore it is just a punch to my wallet. While mistakes are made, I do not believe that hundreds of people are getting tickets that do no deserve them. I feel they are a good thing if it reduces traffic violations and makes money for the dept. Just my two cents.
First off I feel that it is a major violation of privacy, however that is a separate issue. The real issue here is the fact that the wrong person could and in many cases WILL get the fine for something they did not do. Furthermore traffic enforcement in general (but esp. cameras) have done NOTHING to prevent traffic accidents, fatalities etc… What WAS proven to work was extending the length of the yellow light for about 3 seconds longer. I feel that traffic cameras are a revenue raising measure, not about enforcing the law. The job of the LEO and the Police Dept. are to enforce the law, not to raise money for their department or municipality.
We are just beginning to introduce red light cameras into our town and, of course, the city council considered the projected revenue each would bring when they decided to install them. Apparently, for a city of our size, we’re looking at millions over the course of a year. The money goes into a “general fund” for the city and cannot go directly to the police department, in order to avoid the appearance of greed, impropriety, bias, etc… While I certainly can appreciate the increase in public safety and decrease in traffic violations the cameras will supposedly create, I think the ill will that is going to be created with the public outweighs any potential benefits. Wherever these cameras have been installed, the public reaction has been very negative. You can explain until you’re blue in the face that the “revenue is not our concern, safety is” but it will not matter. As the administrators of the program, the police become the focus of peoples’ ire. Fear of Big Brother is instilled in Americans, and it should be! I find most people I stop for red light violations are willing to accept the consequences face-to-face. Hitting them by camera is impersonal, free of discretion, and simply begs to stir the fear of Big Brother watchng our day-to-day activity. Remember, in all the great distopian novels of the last century (1984, Fahrenheit 451, and others) totalitarianism crept in under the guise of SAFETY and SECURITY.
couldn’t agree more Mike, the last thing we need is to create an “Orwellian” society where we are being watched all the time. Call me paranoid but I have a health distrust of the government because of a little thing we call historical precedence. The less liberty and privacy we have no matter if in the town sqaure or our homes the more likely we are setting ourselves up for corrupt, tyrannical government.
Well, I’m stationed here in Germany, I work with CID, and they use the speeding cameras here, they don’t actually run traffic that often, but, the difference in here and the States is that here they take 3 photos in almost immediate succession, one an overal picture of the car/license plate, one a close up of the driver, and they get GREAT quality, and one of the license plate, now, granted there are front license plates here….maybe all states should require them, that how I feel, I’m from TX and worked as an MP and I can’t say how many times a front license plate has helped catch someone on post for somethine, ie burglary, DUI called in, Stolen vehicle etc. I think its a good idea, but we need to do it like the Germans do, there is no contesting it, if you didn’t do it, you don’t get the ticket, they can run the face pic through a system and find the driver. Just my 2 Cents for what its worth.
My city started using redlight and then speed cameras about three years ago under the premiss of “Safety”. When the state saw the money to be made and moved in to take it, the Mayor shut the cameras down. So much for “Safety”. The city and the Police department were also embarrassed when they were unable to show that accidents had been reduced at the intersections with the cameras. The Police Department also will initiate an internal investigation on any officer caught on the cameras in their units. Since it is a civil violation, a person can speed through a redlight as often as they like, pay the fines, and still have a valid drivers license. Today, the cameras remain, the fines have been reduced, the state takes a cut of the money, and accidents have not been reduced.
i believe that the majority of speeding enforcement is more about revenue generation than public safety. I felt that way as cop, and still feel that way as a civilian. Traffic cameras are just too easy a revenue stream for adminstrators to resist, and budget concerns will trump civil liberties in the end. If we really were concerned about our roadway mortality rate, we’d make it much more difficult to get a driver’s license in the first place, and start hammering people for things like poor lane discipline, obstructing the passing lane, passing on the right, etc.
The incremental encroachment on our freedoms is like the frog in a pan of cold water being gradually heated. He’ll happily sit there until it boils. To paraphrase Ben Franklin, it appears that majority of Americans are willing to give up substantial personal freedoms in exchange for an APPEARANCE of security. I’m afraid we’ll get the frog soup we deserve.
The problem is there are too many braindead, and ethically corrupt revenue raising public servants in city hall.
And a minority percentage who also have idiot syndrome on the roads. We are all being punished by these morons. otherwise, if properly implemented, you would get the bad guys, and the good guys would kick your ass everytime these cameras went in. 1) Get Rid on collusion between speed camera corporations and 2) Create a situation where this revenue goes to help the poorer community. We will see some changes then