comment
stringlengths 1
9.9k
| context
sequencelengths 0
835
|
|---|---|
>
Most speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving.
In Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.
There is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity."
] |
>
In Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.
To be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome.
There is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.
Evidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.
You need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought.
TV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial.
And remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket.
That is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court."
] |
>
If the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.
If it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.
If it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.
In Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket.
Psychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.
The best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies.
Cops should always look for bad drivers.
Cameras at common speeding locations.
Signs showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.
Physical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required."
] |
>
Traffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety.
In the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue.
We even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights.
It doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips."
] |
>
Speeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety."
] |
>
You didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment."
] |
>
Pulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them."
] |
>
Quite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term? | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras"
] |
>
I can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?"
] |
>
All that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops."
] |
>
Not really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets."
] |
>
I most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so.
Camera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works."
] |
>
Speeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything."
] |
>
Camera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect"
] |
>
Well that's a simple fix. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance."
] |
>
In the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix."
] |
>
They could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment."
] |
>
Courts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses."
] |
>
8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional."
] |
>
In America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :
intoxicated people
people in the commission of another crime
people with arrest warrants
people suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)
identifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)
finding stolen vehicles
Etc.
The crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country."
] |
>
You can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding.
You should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved.
Also a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would."
] |
>
So you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts) | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can."
] |
>
Someone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)"
] |
>
(not the OP)
He's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them."
] |
>
Like people who don't use turn signals? | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders."
] |
>
Easier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.
What you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?"
] |
>
As much as people in general are skeptical of the police...
Police presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby."
] |
>
Except German roads are way more safe than American roads, so… | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road."
] |
>
Yes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…"
] |
>
One problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.
An even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation."
] |
>
I have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits."
] |
>
ABSOLUTLY NOT.
Then I cant ever go over the speed limit. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign."
] |
>
Speeding drones! | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit."
] |
>
Several issues prohibit this from being successful in America.
Eight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system.
(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us).
Additionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich.
Also, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations.
But! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. "gives the option" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol)
No court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture?
Seattle tried the whole "No traffic stops" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!"
] |
>
Police serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment."
] |
>
How would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions? | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit."
] |
>
If I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?"
] |
>
That's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets."
] |
>
Just out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested? | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is."
] |
>
Can you contest it if you get pulled over for speeding during an emergency? | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is.",
">\n\nJust out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested?"
] |
>
Yes. At least in my state, a medical emergency is a defense to DUI as well. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is.",
">\n\nJust out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested?",
">\n\nCan you contest it if you get pulled over for speeding during an emergency?"
] |
>
I might be mistaking, but I think I saw some presentation of statistics about those cameras and how they are on one hand government or state distortion (whatever it was in america) and on the other that they increased car crashes. I will look for it and if I'll find it I'll add the link. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is.",
">\n\nJust out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested?",
">\n\nCan you contest it if you get pulled over for speeding during an emergency?",
">\n\nYes. At least in my state, a medical emergency is a defense to DUI as well."
] |
>
If people will descend into lawless anarchy without police constantly monitoring and apprehending criminals then I think there is a bigger issue at play. The solution to which is absolutely not clamping down harder with more police, human or machine. | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is.",
">\n\nJust out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested?",
">\n\nCan you contest it if you get pulled over for speeding during an emergency?",
">\n\nYes. At least in my state, a medical emergency is a defense to DUI as well.",
">\n\nI might be mistaking, but I think I saw some presentation of statistics about those cameras and how they are on one hand government or state distortion (whatever it was in america) and on the other that they increased car crashes. I will look for it and if I'll find it I'll add the link."
] |
> | [
"Easier to catch speeders.\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. This also leads to the loophole of vehicles being registered to companies instead of people. \n\nLess speeding stops by cops means less police interaction\n\nYou paint this in a bad light. Many dangerous criminals are taken off the street as a result of a simple traffic stop for a minor infraction. This helps to fight human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.\n\nIf multiple people are street racing, or speeding as a group for some other reason, everyone gets caught\n\nEveryone gets identified, but it doesn't immediately deter the dangerous activity. If a group of street racers are racing each other, they could crash their car into an innocent bystander, injure themselves or each other. In the moment, they aren't thinking about getting a ticket and likely don't care. Even if law enforcement doesn't catch all of them, they have still accomplished the goal of deterring the activity.",
">\n\n\nMost speed cameras take a picture of the vehicle and the license plate, not the driver. Cars don't get speeding tickets, people do. While there are SCOTUS precedents saying an officer may assume the registered owner of the car is driving for purposes of initiating a traffic stop to arrest a wanted person; you can't just give a ticket to the registered owner. You have to prove they were driving. \n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.",
">\n\n\nIn Germany all speed cameras take a photo of the front of the car, so you can see the driver through the windshield and identify them that way.\n\nTo be fair, this likely may not be enough when challenged with US law. The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. It is a significant hurdle to overcome. \n\nThere is no difference with an burglar or shoplifter caught on a security camera. I'm no expert on the US constitution but I see no reason why it can't be used as evidence in court.\n\nEvidence yes - conclusive proof - not necessarily. Merely looking like the guy on the tape is only good enough for probable cause to get a search warrant. It takes more to get a conviction should a person choose to fight it.\nYou need to be careful with selection bias here. There are two types - the TV dramatization that does not reflect reality and then the cases that are actually brought. \nTV not being reality ought to be obvious. The second part is important. In actual cases where this is used, there is enough other evidence that it gets brought to trial. It is ignoring every case where not enough evidence exists and it is never brought to trial. \nAnd remember, it is the burden of the STATE to prove who was driving, not the accused. An example - a father/son are in the car driving along speeding. A picture is taken showing both in the front seat. Now - prove who is who to issue the ticket. \nThat is why in most cases, an officer stopping the actual person driving is required.",
">\n\nIf the goal is to actually reduce speeding, camera's aren't that great.\n\n\nIf it moves around, people will just slow when the see a car parked.\n\n\nIf it is in a standard location, people will just slow at that location.\n\n\nIn Canada, we get a letter 3-4 weeks later with the ticket. Most of the time you never even remember when/where you got the ticket. \n\n\nPsychologically, it's an awful way to learn a lesson because its so disconnected time-wise. A cop gives you a ticket the exact moment you are speeding.\n\n\nThe best strategy to reduce speeding is actually a bunch of strategies. \nCops should always look for bad drivers.\nCameras at common speeding locations.\nSigns showing your speed for school zones or locations with slower than expected speeds.\nPhysical roadways items like speedbumps, curves, or sleep strips.",
">\n\nTraffic cameras are abused in the US. They put them up visibly in Germany so people know to keep their speed down, and occasionally use mobile ones in sensitive areas (I often saw one near a school). Often, towns will have many of the fixed camera boxes, but only a few cameras they rotate around. But people still slow down for the boxes. The goal isn't revenue, but safety. \nIn the US, towns have shown they will put up cameras for maximum revenue. Say you have two stretches of road. One doesn't get much speeding, but has a lot of accidents involving the few who do speed. The other has a lot of speeding, but few accidents. The American town will put the camera on the latter in order to bring in more revenue. \nWe even do this with red light cameras. Germany just puts them at the more dangerous intersections. We put them at the most traveled intersections, and then we shorten the yellow light time to increase the number of people who run red lights. \nIt doesn't help that most of our cameras are set up by companies with a revenue sharing agreement with the city. That provides incentive to value revenue over safety.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets only punish the driver after they are done speeding, it doesn’t stop the speeder from speeding and possibly endangering more lives. That’s the idea behind live police officers, it’s real time prevention, not punishment.",
">\n\nYou didn't mention at all how dangerous speeding can be. People get killed all the time because of speeding and accidents. If someone is driving like a maniac they should be pulled over. Getting a ticket will do nothing to stop them.",
">\n\nPulling them over just stops them for a few minutes. Then they go back to speeding. There’s nothing about being pulled over that would change their long term behavior more effectively than speed cameras",
">\n\nQuite the opposite. Speed camera tickets slow people down for 5 seconds. You learn where they are immediately, and they carry next to no penalty. Why would he impact someone long term?",
">\n\nI can personally testify that getting 3 tickets in 3 months from speed cameras and paying hundreds of euros in fines got me to drive the speed limit. I’d never have been caught that many times by actual cops.",
">\n\nAll that would do would tell you to slow down in one very specific area. They are trivial tickets.",
">\n\nNot really, like I said they put up temporary ones in random locations. Just like cops being posted up randomly to catch speeders, but I’m sure you think that works.",
">\n\nI most certainly don’t think cops stop speeding. Everyone speeds. That’s because anyone who can do math can work out that it’s cost effective to do so. \nCamera tickets are meaningless though. You can almost always see where they are, and in the US, a $40 ticket with no points isn’t going to do anything.",
">\n\nSpeeding tickets will increase your insurance costs so I’d say even if it doesn’t affect your license it still has an effect",
">\n\nCamera tickets do not, as they do not get reported to your driving record or insurance.",
">\n\nWell that's a simple fix.",
">\n\nIn the United States, speed cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the 6th amendment.",
">\n\nThey could potentially violate the 6th if criminal charges are brought against the offender. Moving violations such as speeding are not considered criminal offenses.",
">\n\nCourts in multiple states have ruled them unconstitutional.",
">\n\n8 states if I remember correctly. Unfortunately they are still being used in the majority of the country.",
">\n\nIn America, traffic violation pull over is one the main ways the police directly interacts with citizens, at around 80% of all interactions with the public (for normal police departments, excluding specialised agencies) and so this becomes a way to find :\n\nintoxicated people\npeople in the commission of another crime\npeople with arrest warrants \npeople suffering from various problems where they shouldn't be behind a wheel (severe Alzheimer's, psychotic break, etc)\nidentifying possible victims and/or suspects(during an amber alert for example)\nfinding stolen vehicles \n\nEtc.\nThe crime rate in Germany is overall much lower than most parts of the USA, and a camera wouldn't catch most of what a simple roadside in-person verification would.",
">\n\nYou can still catch people for those thing patrolling the roads for other forms of unsafe driving besides speeding. \nYou should not consider it a good thing that cops use speeding stops as a way to look for an excuse to step on citizens’ 4th amendment rights. Remember when most cops could just say they smelled weed and instantly have a right to search anyone’s car? It’s not a good thing, and not much has improved. \nAlso a speed camera’s pictures fed into a database could probably identify stolen cars way more efficiently than cops can.",
">\n\nSo you propose that to prevent the possibility of constitutional rights violations the US should guarantee rights violations? Cameras wouldn't run afoul of the 4th, but they do for the 6th (according to 8 state's courts)",
">\n\nSomeone speeding is more likely to cause an accident. A camera can't stop them, it can only lead to them being ticketed later. A cop can stop them. If not, the cop can call for backup and multiple cops can stop them.",
">\n\n(not the OP)\nHe's not suggesting not patrolling the streets. You still do that for cases of aggravated speeding and reckless driving. You just don't focus on regular speeders as much, let the automated systems handle that. If anything it would free up resources to go after the more egregious offenders.",
">\n\nLike people who don't use turn signals?",
">\n\n\nEasier to catch speeders. More tickets, more revenue for the community. That or it’s better at encouraging the community to mind their speed more often, not just when they see cops.\n\nWhat you call a benefit I call the problem, basically word for word. Speed cameras make it easier for the government to wrong random people for money even though they caused no harm. It makes people more likely to comply with bullshit laws we shouldn't have in the first place by making enforcement omnipresent rather than just when there's a cop nearby.",
">\n\nAs much as people in general are skeptical of the police...\nPolice presence itself is often a deterrent for illegal activity. If we remove all police from the roads, people will almost have no fear of speeding (and will just use google maps to notify them of where the speed cameras are). Everyone speeding means a less safe road.",
">\n\nExcept German roads are way more safe than American roads, so…",
">\n\nYes, but you are comparing apples to oranges. German roads are safer, BUT German drivers go through mandatory training, have to pay a decent amount of money to get a license, have safer road design/maintenance, and more public transportation. Attributing it only to speed cameras is illogical, unless you have a source to show a correlation.",
">\n\nOne problem with speed cameras is that they don't punish the driver of the car at the time of speeding. It punishes the owner of the car, which admittedly is often the driver but not necessarily.\nAn even more compelling argument against speed cameras is that there are no demerit points to be lost in these cases because the driver of the car cannot be positively identified, only the vehicle. In effect, it becomes a service fee for the rich to drive as fast as they want as long as they pay the fine with no danger of losing their license. I'm sure this is not the intended effect of enforcing speed limits.",
">\n\nI have never seen a speed camera system that wasn't a vicious cash grab. In Illinois speed cameras are only legal in a construction zone so they put out two cones on the highway and ticket anyone going over 35. They often don't post the required signage for the camera and by the time you receive the ticket the cones have moved and it's impossible fight the ticket by proving that there was no sign.",
">\n\nABSOLUTLY NOT.\nThen I cant ever go over the speed limit.",
">\n\nSpeeding drones!",
">\n\nSeveral issues prohibit this from being successful in America. \nEight states don't allow it at all, I remember when South Carolina got rid of it. The news was always talking about how most of the revenue went to the company that owned the equipment. It was cost prohibitive for most towns to buy the equipment themselves, so just like toll roads, Americans wouldn't own the system. \n(Search who owns the major toll roads in America, it's not us). \nAdditionally, the driver isn't held accountable, it's just the registered owner, so no points are assessed, and their insurance is not notified of an infraction. So, if one is willing to pay, they can speed all they want, so this automatically favors the rich. \nAlso, even Washington D.C. and Maryland, who have more cameras than you can imagine won't bother trying to identify the driver of the vehicle, because they would tie their courts up with soooo many contested tickets it would become a cost burden in court time. After all it is on the state to prove their accusations. \nBut! Then the real legal problems come. Can the state compel the registered owner to identify who actually was driving the vehicle? (D.C. \"gives the option\" to prove it wasn't the RO of the vehicle lol) \nNo court system wants that mess, that's why no points are assigned and they don't want to bother identifying the driver. So, instead they just make it the owners problem and they can't renew their registration until the tickets are paid. . . So now what does the camera do with an unregistered vehicle? Take a picture? \nSeattle tried the whole \"No traffic stops\" for police thing, and now the city is losing soo much money in vehicle registrations. So if they don't drive out of the city (where a State Trooper or King County Deputy will get them), then they just rack up as many as they want with little punishment.",
">\n\nPolice serve a purpose far beyond pulling people over. Reducing the size of the police force would make all crimes more easy to commit.",
">\n\nHow would your 5th Amendment right to confront your accuser in court work? Would the unbolt the speed camera and bring it in and put it on the witness chair so you our your attorney could ask it questions?",
">\n\nIf I drive on the toll road without one of those stickers for it to scan and charge an account, it snaps a picture of my plates and bills me for the toll plus fines. Somehow the constitution doesn’t apply there, so we can just do it the same way for speeding tickets.",
">\n\nThat's an administrative citation rather than a crime like speeding is.",
">\n\nJust out of curiosity, if one is caught speeding because of an emergency trip to a medical center or something similar, can the ticket ve contested?",
">\n\nCan you contest it if you get pulled over for speeding during an emergency?",
">\n\nYes. At least in my state, a medical emergency is a defense to DUI as well.",
">\n\nI might be mistaking, but I think I saw some presentation of statistics about those cameras and how they are on one hand government or state distortion (whatever it was in america) and on the other that they increased car crashes. I will look for it and if I'll find it I'll add the link.",
">\n\nIf people will descend into lawless anarchy without police constantly monitoring and apprehending criminals then I think there is a bigger issue at play. The solution to which is absolutely not clamping down harder with more police, human or machine."
] |
While I similarly would never get into a long-distance relationship, I don't think it's true that all long-distance relationships converge into one-person-cheats or a similarly sad ending. I think that two people's intense feelings can overcome temporary long-term situations, albeit I believe it to be a rare occurrence. It's commendable, though. This is the type of trial that no one really wants to be a part of but, when it's over, it's still admirable. While *clearly* not the same in magnitude, I always think of the soldier back in the 1900s sent off to war, and coming back to a faithful and loving girlfriend/wife. A real tearjerker, if you ask me.
How many times have you seen relationships that are not long distance that last even through cheating and manipulation and what naught? I know of a couple where the dude cheated on his s/o \~ 10 times. She knew of all 10, wasn't happy with any of them, and stayed with him, moved in with him, and even accepted his promise ring. No joke, he gives her a promise ring and the very first trip away from her texted our group chat saying "I think I'm gonna cheat on S tonight."
My view is toxic people are gonna end up in toxic situations regardless of the semantics of the situation. | [] |
>
Yeesh. You were okay associating yourself with a person like that? | [
"While I similarly would never get into a long-distance relationship, I don't think it's true that all long-distance relationships converge into one-person-cheats or a similarly sad ending. I think that two people's intense feelings can overcome temporary long-term situations, albeit I believe it to be a rare occurrence. It's commendable, though. This is the type of trial that no one really wants to be a part of but, when it's over, it's still admirable. While *clearly* not the same in magnitude, I always think of the soldier back in the 1900s sent off to war, and coming back to a faithful and loving girlfriend/wife. A real tearjerker, if you ask me.\nHow many times have you seen relationships that are not long distance that last even through cheating and manipulation and what naught? I know of a couple where the dude cheated on his s/o \\~ 10 times. She knew of all 10, wasn't happy with any of them, and stayed with him, moved in with him, and even accepted his promise ring. No joke, he gives her a promise ring and the very first trip away from her texted our group chat saying \"I think I'm gonna cheat on S tonight.\"\nMy view is toxic people are gonna end up in toxic situations regardless of the semantics of the situation."
] |
>
I mean, that's not even a long distance relationship. He's on vacation | [
"While I similarly would never get into a long-distance relationship, I don't think it's true that all long-distance relationships converge into one-person-cheats or a similarly sad ending. I think that two people's intense feelings can overcome temporary long-term situations, albeit I believe it to be a rare occurrence. It's commendable, though. This is the type of trial that no one really wants to be a part of but, when it's over, it's still admirable. While *clearly* not the same in magnitude, I always think of the soldier back in the 1900s sent off to war, and coming back to a faithful and loving girlfriend/wife. A real tearjerker, if you ask me.\nHow many times have you seen relationships that are not long distance that last even through cheating and manipulation and what naught? I know of a couple where the dude cheated on his s/o \\~ 10 times. She knew of all 10, wasn't happy with any of them, and stayed with him, moved in with him, and even accepted his promise ring. No joke, he gives her a promise ring and the very first trip away from her texted our group chat saying \"I think I'm gonna cheat on S tonight.\"\nMy view is toxic people are gonna end up in toxic situations regardless of the semantics of the situation.",
">\n\nYeesh. You were okay associating yourself with a person like that?"
] |
>
Yeah but it's still considered long distance since he's not coming back to California until like May. | [
"While I similarly would never get into a long-distance relationship, I don't think it's true that all long-distance relationships converge into one-person-cheats or a similarly sad ending. I think that two people's intense feelings can overcome temporary long-term situations, albeit I believe it to be a rare occurrence. It's commendable, though. This is the type of trial that no one really wants to be a part of but, when it's over, it's still admirable. While *clearly* not the same in magnitude, I always think of the soldier back in the 1900s sent off to war, and coming back to a faithful and loving girlfriend/wife. A real tearjerker, if you ask me.\nHow many times have you seen relationships that are not long distance that last even through cheating and manipulation and what naught? I know of a couple where the dude cheated on his s/o \\~ 10 times. She knew of all 10, wasn't happy with any of them, and stayed with him, moved in with him, and even accepted his promise ring. No joke, he gives her a promise ring and the very first trip away from her texted our group chat saying \"I think I'm gonna cheat on S tonight.\"\nMy view is toxic people are gonna end up in toxic situations regardless of the semantics of the situation.",
">\n\nYeesh. You were okay associating yourself with a person like that?",
">\n\nI mean, that's not even a long distance relationship. He's on vacation"
] |
> | [
"While I similarly would never get into a long-distance relationship, I don't think it's true that all long-distance relationships converge into one-person-cheats or a similarly sad ending. I think that two people's intense feelings can overcome temporary long-term situations, albeit I believe it to be a rare occurrence. It's commendable, though. This is the type of trial that no one really wants to be a part of but, when it's over, it's still admirable. While *clearly* not the same in magnitude, I always think of the soldier back in the 1900s sent off to war, and coming back to a faithful and loving girlfriend/wife. A real tearjerker, if you ask me.\nHow many times have you seen relationships that are not long distance that last even through cheating and manipulation and what naught? I know of a couple where the dude cheated on his s/o \\~ 10 times. She knew of all 10, wasn't happy with any of them, and stayed with him, moved in with him, and even accepted his promise ring. No joke, he gives her a promise ring and the very first trip away from her texted our group chat saying \"I think I'm gonna cheat on S tonight.\"\nMy view is toxic people are gonna end up in toxic situations regardless of the semantics of the situation.",
">\n\nYeesh. You were okay associating yourself with a person like that?",
">\n\nI mean, that's not even a long distance relationship. He's on vacation",
">\n\nYeah but it's still considered long distance since he's not coming back to California until like May."
] |
This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. | [] |
>
Probably wearing regular glasses and had a close call; Then decided he needed a "Safer" pair. | [
"This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.\nRemember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not \"thoughts had in the shower!\"\n(For an explanation of what a \"showerthought\" is, please read this page.)\nRule-breaking posts may result in bans."
] |
> | [
"This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.\nRemember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not \"thoughts had in the shower!\"\n(For an explanation of what a \"showerthought\" is, please read this page.)\nRule-breaking posts may result in bans.",
">\n\nProbably wearing regular glasses and had a close call; Then decided he needed a \"Safer\" pair."
] |
I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.
If it wasn’t travel it would have been something else | [] |
>
Hey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part.
No one is forcing you to do the latter. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else"
] |
>
The thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter."
] |
>
oh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first."
] |
>
Yes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then"
] |
>
If your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly? | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead."
] |
>
Tourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?"
] |
>
Lol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists."
] |
>
When someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past."
] |
>
you have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a "traveler" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else "has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition."
] |
>
I don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing."
] |
>
You just only know lame travelers | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing.",
">\n\nI don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame"
] |
>
I once heard a “old time traveler” referred to himself as a seeker and a wonderer. I think it goes more with what you first described. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing.",
">\n\nI don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame",
">\n\nYou just only know lame travelers"
] |
>
I'm sure there are a lot of legit people out there traveling and not posting about it. I never really considered going to an island resort with unlimited booze "traveling". Whatever. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing.",
">\n\nI don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame",
">\n\nYou just only know lame travelers",
">\n\nI once heard a “old time traveler” referred to himself as a seeker and a wonderer. I think it goes more with what you first described."
] |
>
ok, thanks for making it declared. good to know Ill pass it on. | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing.",
">\n\nI don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame",
">\n\nYou just only know lame travelers",
">\n\nI once heard a “old time traveler” referred to himself as a seeker and a wonderer. I think it goes more with what you first described.",
">\n\nI'm sure there are a lot of legit people out there traveling and not posting about it. I never really considered going to an island resort with unlimited booze \"traveling\". Whatever."
] |
> | [
"I think you’re describing people that use travel as a way to get attention on Instagram and not someone who actually enjoys traveling.\nIf it wasn’t travel it would have been something else",
">\n\nHey OP you could always uhh.... not do that and instead do the first part. \nNo one is forcing you to do the latter.",
">\n\nThe thing is I travel with family and often with friends. If I was traveling alone then you're right I could get around this relatively easily. We definitely do find a midway when planning but it's definitely closer to the second part than the first.",
">\n\noh well then this is just a complaint about your family and friends then",
">\n\nYes, but to clarify; I don't blame them and choose to blame the travel culture instead.",
">\n\nIf your issue is just people 'stealing' the word traveler from you, you should probably relax. The good news is none of these people will be out enjoying the things you seem to. They're not there ruining it for you, so what's the problem exactly?",
">\n\nTourism has always been a thing for the upper middle class and the wealthy. People may try to call themselves travelers instead but nothing has changed. The only ones going on adventures are the broke college kid tourists.",
">\n\nLol. You have a completely romanticized idea of what travel was in the past.",
">\n\nWhen someone tells me they’re a “traveller”, my first thought would not be to your definition.",
">\n\nyou have the freedom to do whatever you want. you can still be a \"traveler\" by your own definition of what that means to you. just because everyone else \"has 7 credit cards and goes on popular hikes to post to instagram\" doesn't mean that you have to do that same thing.",
">\n\nI don’t agree that traveling itself is lame. But I would agree that the way many people portray their travels through instagram is lame. The fake candid photos and the ‘look at how cultured I am!’ is pretty fucking lame",
">\n\nYou just only know lame travelers",
">\n\nI once heard a “old time traveler” referred to himself as a seeker and a wonderer. I think it goes more with what you first described.",
">\n\nI'm sure there are a lot of legit people out there traveling and not posting about it. I never really considered going to an island resort with unlimited booze \"traveling\". Whatever.",
">\n\nok, thanks for making it declared. good to know Ill pass it on."
] |
""It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year," said the neighbor who did not want to be identified."
Oops. | [] |
>
Good thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys! | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops."
] |
>
Oh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!"
] |
>
Poor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook."
] |
>
This is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse."
] |
>
In 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February."
] |
>
24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them."
] |
>
Lmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central."
] |
>
Oh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas"
] |
>
When is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood? | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium."
] |
>
This is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?"
] |
>
I thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03 | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built."
] |
>
Honestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03"
] |
>
I just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life."
] |
>
Which one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction."
] |
>
I was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ? | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though."
] |
>
Oh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?"
] |
>
There's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.
Edit: looked it up, District 5 | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix."
] |
>
The hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5"
] |
>
Bruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀 | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related"
] |
>
Not anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀"
] |
>
Do you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager."
] |
>
Yea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass"
] |
>
Why exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles."
] |
>
Why exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty?
Because the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though."
] |
>
1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot."
] |
>
1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :) | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something."
] |
>
I know that doesn’t say subtitles but i can’t stop reading it as subtitles | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something.",
">\n\n1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :)"
] |
>
I need to use a different word as I made the damn comment and read it the same way. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something.",
">\n\n1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :)",
">\n\nI know that doesn’t say subtitles but i can’t stop reading it as subtitles"
] |
>
read that line like 7 times. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something.",
">\n\n1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :)",
">\n\nI know that doesn’t say subtitles but i can’t stop reading it as subtitles",
">\n\nI need to use a different word as I made the damn comment and read it the same way."
] |
>
Prolly the usual, took drugs to sell, lost the goods or decided not to pay back. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something.",
">\n\n1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :)",
">\n\nI know that doesn’t say subtitles but i can’t stop reading it as subtitles",
">\n\nI need to use a different word as I made the damn comment and read it the same way.",
">\n\nread that line like 7 times."
] |
>
Yup, thats my thought. Got in too deep playing gangster and owed money to the wrong people. Street Cred is great but street "justice" is very real. | [
"\"\"It's crazy, because I went to school with him last year,\" said the neighbor who did not want to be identified.\"\nOops.",
">\n\nGood thing there is definitely nothing identifiable there. Bake em away toys!",
">\n\nOh there definitely is, he described how he watched the whole thing outside his window. Not much to narrow down there if you have his high school yearbook.",
">\n\nPoor kid/family….there’s so much crazy shit happening around the valley these days. I lived off of Camelback & 19th and there was someone getting shot or robbed daily it seemed. Hell a kid got killed where I regularly walk my dog…needles everywhere, people walking around like zombies, accosted everywhere you go. It’s a madhouse.",
">\n\nThis is the reason I left the city. I used to live near central. The amount of killings, drugs, and homelessness is crazy. The last straw was when one of my special-needs customers was shot and left for dead in the street this past February.",
">\n\nIn 2002 I decided to move to Washington State just outside of Seattle instead of move to an apartment near 24th Street and Osborn. Part of it was the crime in the area, partly because of education (my oldest was about to go into elementary school) and also thinking about what climate change was going to do to the Valley. I still have a lot of family and friends that live there though, so seeing the area decline makes me so sad and worried for them.",
">\n\n24th and Osborn was always tame (by comparison at least) and has gotten better with its proximity to Arcadia and the Biltmore. East of Central has always been miles above the neighborhoods west of Central.",
">\n\nLmao yeah comparing 24th/Osborn to 19th/Camelback is laughable to anyone familiar with the two areas",
">\n\nOh shit! This happened down the street from the Cardinals stadium in Glendale. Literally 1.5 miles. 91ave and Camelback. It used to be a really nice neighborhood. That whole area has gone downhill since they built the stadium.",
">\n\nWhen is the last time Maryvale was a nice neighborhood?",
">\n\nThis is a different part of Maryvale that was middle class and majority farmland. Prior to the stadium being built. Grew up over there. Lived there before the 101 was built.",
">\n\nI thought Maryvale was 75th Ave and Thomas area ? Was stationed in Phoenix area 97 to 01 time frame. Haven't been there since 03",
">\n\nHonestly, I don’t think a lot of people from this area consider it Maryvale. I honestly didn’t realize it was part of Maryvale until this article and I’ve lived here my whole life.",
">\n\nI just remembered the school... It was in Phoenix though, and 91 ave and camelback is Glendale I think ? That might be the distinction.",
">\n\nWhich one? Westview or Kellis? Kellis is Peoria though.",
">\n\nI was talking about Maryvale school in Phoenix.. I do remember Westview, but I think that was Tolleson district when I was there ?",
">\n\nOh okay. Yes, that’s Tolleson district, but it’s in Phoenix. 107 and Indian School is Phoenix.",
">\n\nThere's a thin official Phoenix district that spans pretty far west.\nEdit: looked it up, District 5",
">\n\nThe hitmen were armed with ar15s and coordinated. Probably cartel related",
">\n\nBruh you can buy that shit at Walmart 💀",
">\n\nNot anymore you cant. Regardless, you and your buddies don't all buy them and coordinate a kidnap and murder just because ar15s are legal. You don't usually need multiple long rifles and a team to kidnap a teenager.",
">\n\nDo you know how much easier it is to buy a gun at the gun show coming up than Walmart? Also sportsman’s warehouse has AR15s out the ass",
">\n\nYea but who spends hundreds of dollars on ar15s with multiple people just to kidnap a teen boy? The only time I've seen teams of violent criminals who weren't white supremacists were cartel. Local gangs usually carry pistols, not rifles.",
">\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? Seems like the kid got involved with something he shouldn't have though.",
">\n\n\nWhy exactly are surveillance cameras still so shitty? \n\nBecause the cost of storing and maintaning 24/7 of good quality HD or 4K video stream is a lot.",
">\n\n1080p with a decent bitrate should be less than 1gb per hour, no? Buying 10tb isn't that expensive, maybe $400. That would let you save 10k hours of footage. Or just buy 1tb for $40 and save 1k hours. Maybe I'm missing something.",
">\n\n1080 H.264 High Quality @ 12FPS is about 2 GB per hour. I work in the industry and people don't understand pixels on target and a lot of other subtilties. Most home cameras don't have great images in low light. Lighting is the problem with these images and that's not as cheap as storage :)",
">\n\nI know that doesn’t say subtitles but i can’t stop reading it as subtitles",
">\n\nI need to use a different word as I made the damn comment and read it the same way.",
">\n\nread that line like 7 times.",
">\n\nProlly the usual, took drugs to sell, lost the goods or decided not to pay back."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.