CAUTION- New Police Tool !!!!!!! - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

el presidente · #16 02-20-2003, 07:16 AM

Wow

Interesting thread.....and scary too.

I suppose it's about time to check into those "Bond-style" rotating license plates

jsmith · #17 02-20-2003, 09:35 AM

Well, they still sell these things don't they?

anti-photo shields

In some places they are illegal but I also came across a wax that produces the same effect. Can't find the link for that one though...

blackmercedes · #18 02-20-2003, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Freestyler
The thing is.. These vans (and the threat of not knowing where they are) are supposed to increase the safety of traffic by making people drive slower. But what happens is, that whenever a driver see a van parked road-side, he/she slams the brakes a creates a dangerous situation. That's not very cool..

Freestyler

Here too! We have photo radar, and they use mostly mini-vans. When ever you see a mini-van parked on the side of the road, brake lights come on and traffic slows like crazy. Is this safe? NO. Everyone is in such a bloody panic over the photo-buggy that driving goes out the window. Traffic that was flowing nicely has become compressed and dangerous. Also, those not seeing the van can't figure out what the heck everyone else is doing.

I tried one day on the freeway of following the speed-limit instead of driving with traffic flow. That was SCARY. People rushing by me, making it impossible to change lanes at on-ramps. Everyone was frustrated and angry with me. So, what should we do? Drive the limit and create an unsafe environment? Why is everyone driving 15 km/h over the speed limit? Is it the speed limits are too low? Good question.

I feel that hidden photo-radar vans are cash collectors. Ones in plain view slow people down, but only while the van is in sight. The REAL problems on the road are aggressive drivers, tailgating, cutting people off, and generally road raging. Just yesterday I saw a fellow in a truck raging through traffic cause a collision. We have no enforcement when it comes to true dangerous behaviour.

Now, we have cameras and "stations" to determine our average speeds. Nice. Orwell is smiling at us now. Anyone read 1984 lately? It is scary just how close we are to the society he portrayed in the novel. The cameras. The non-independant media. The complete lack of privacy. Wonder what George would have thought about Canada's government talking about "National ID cards" that would carry your biometric information and be required to pretty much walk through any door?

We are letting the government trample our privacy rights in the interest of "safety" (traffic) or "security" (everywhere else). 9-11 was just the excuse they were waiting for.

mikemover · #19 02-20-2003, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by blackmercedes
This is not a slippery slope. We have crashed down the bank and are drowning in the pool.

Right to privacy has basically been tossed into the garbage post 9-11. One big excuse to take away our rights. Bin Laden wins again.

I agree with smashing those damn cameras. However, wouldn't that be a criminal act, Mike? Hhhhmmm.

Back to B.C. You fools elected Campbell. Kick that tyrant out of office.

Wow, John...ANOTHER thing that we agree on?! The planets must be aligned or something!

Yes, that would be a crime...I didn't say I'd be doing it, although I might...but regardless...it would be a response to a crime against the public. I dunno...Call it "justifiable vandalism" or "temporary public sanity" or something.

Mike

yal · #20 02-20-2003, 11:36 AM

Some guy in England got out of his car and went to town on one of these cameras with a baseball bat (cricket bat if you please

).

Small towns and rural subs are more likely to use these cameras. Its much cheaper for them, its not very labour intensive and you can collect a ridiculous amount of revenue from them.

By the way there was special on one of the networks here about this, the camera system was fitted to a crown victoria. They basically pull up in the morning, set the car up, then leave it there till evening. Its a huge cash cow and in today's budgets strapped districts this could be coming to a two lane road near you.

#21 02-20-2003, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Well, they still sell these things don't they?

And did you notice that the license plate covered by the shield said "Beautiful British Columbia" on it?

Buy one of those, put it on, and just claim "Oh, it came with the car when I bought it (if used). I keep it on to keep my license plate clean."

-Sam

BENZ-LGB · #22 02-20-2003, 02:28 PM

..." 'presumed' innocent until proven guilty. " Semantically and logically there is a big difference between the concept of a person being "presumed" innocent until proven guilty and a person "being" innocent till proven guilty. You can't believe how much time I spend trying to educate jurors on the difference.

The other misused phrase that gets to me is "...the prosecution has to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt." The correct terms is, "...the prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

The "shadow of a doubt" phrase got started with Raymond Burr and Perry Mason (for you Gen-Xers, that's the original version of The Practice

)

And as far as the speed measuring devices are concerned, they'd probably be illegal here in the U.S. One of the big differences between traffic cameras and the devices apparently being used in Canada, is that with the camera, one can clearly see (at least under most lighting conditions) who the driver is. They are like the cameras installed at the end of rollercoaster rides. With the speed-device, there is no way for the driver to establish that SODDI (some other dude did it).

The biggest "problem" with traffic cameras is when the police department sends the pic home along with the traffic citation. Your spouse opens the envelope lo and behold, there you are, busy driving with SOP (some other person), on the "wrong" side of town and at the "wrong" time of the day. OUCH!!!

Benzoman · #23 02-20-2003, 02:48 PM

The State of Florida has used the 'rallye' method for years to issue citations on the Florida Turnpike. If you speed then you'd better stop somewhere and let the clock catch up with you. Also the VASCAR airplanes time you in just about every state. Ever wonder what those big white stripes on the freeways are for? They're start\finish lines an exact distance apart. They catch you from the air and radio a ground cop to write the ticket. But I suppose my question would be, why were you speeding to start with? If you play catch me/f#$k me then don't complain when you get caught!

Zeus · #24 02-20-2003, 02:51 PM

Kyle -

I would fight the ticket in court. What they quoted you on the back of the ticket could be taken out of context in a legal manner, in a deliberate move to throw you off balance. Cops do it all the time.

Unless the motor vehicle laws in Canada have changed since I was last in court for a traffic offence, it is the individual, NOT the car, that is fined for a traffic offence.

A motor vehicle cannot be charged with an offence. Only a PERSON can. Regardless of what your ticket says, the prosecution has to charge a person with the offence. Thus, they have to prove that the person being charged was actually present and driving at the time of the offence. As far as I know, there is no legal exception to this rule.

For you to be fined for this violation, the prosecution has to prove that YOU were, in fact, driving the vehicle at the time. Whether you actually were or not is not the point here. It is incumbent upon the prosecution to prove without a doubt, that you were driving. If they simply photographed your plate, they cannot prove that and you should be able to win.

I'm just glad the conservative government finally dumped photo radar in Ontario.

Good luck!

MTI · #25 02-20-2003, 03:03 PM

"People Power" worked in Hawaii last year. The legislature approved the "van cam" and "red light cam" and they went through the two week "we're just issuing warnings" period, the the ***** hit the proverbial fan. The outrage dominated the news for weeks, the police hated it (they even ticketed a van cam for speeding and unauthorized parking on highway!); traffic court judges threw out cases and publicly stated that there was an unwritten 9 mph margin of error before they would convict.

Under withering public outrage, the state finally pulled the plug on the program and got hit with a million dollar contract cancellation penalty from the contractor. I believe that the public was outraged at the "zero tolerance" stance the state was taking and the financial arrangement with the contractor that gave them a cut of the fines.

Freestyler · #26 02-20-2003, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BENZ-LGB
The the biggest "problem" with traffic cameras is when the department sends the pic home along with the traffic citation. Your spouse opens the envelope and sees a picture of the offednig driver, busy driving with SOP (some other person), driving on the "wrong" side of town and at the "wrong" time of the day. OUCH!!!

Actually not.
When you recieve the ticket there IS a nice picture of the car and the driver. But the entire passenger side is manually blacked out in the picture, regardless if someone was sitting there or not.
This is to avoid the scenario you mentioned.

Now.. How would i know all this?

For a great laugh.. check out THIS site. The british are actually DOING something about it! (choose the button "Gatso" on the menu - then choose "Page 2 - Vandalized Gatsos". Very entertaining.

Freestyler

mikemover · #27 02-20-2003, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzoman
...But I suppose my question would be, why were you speeding to start with? If you play catch me/f#$k me then don't complain when you get caught!

Because such low speed limits on the open highway are just another example of government revenue-grubbing and idiot-proofing!

A LOT more lives could be saved by actually TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO DRIVE!!!!!!!!!

But that approach won't stuff nearly as much money into the local/state government pockets...so it will probably never happen.

Mike

Ken300D · #28 02-20-2003, 08:19 PM

Quote:

And as far as the speed measuring devices are concerned, they'd probably be illegal here in the U.S. One of the big differences between traffic cameras and the devices apparently being used in Canada, is that with the camera, one can clearly see (at least under most lighting conditions) who the driver is.

The intersections I go by in Maryland and Virginia that have red-light cameras take pictures of the BACK of the car. This gets the license plate - the ticket is sent to the owner of the car no matter who was driving.

At one intersection I go through every day on the way to work, they shortened the yellow time - more revenue I suppose. When the light turns yellow you'd DARNED well better slam on the brakes to stop if you don't want a ticket.

Ken300D

Benzoman · #29 02-20-2003, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mikemover

A LOT more lives could be saved by actually TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO DRIVE!!!!!!!!!
Mike

I agree! But that would be lesson #2, right after we teach people how to THINK!!

#30 02-20-2003, 10:11 PM

Boy I'm real glad we don't have that here my liesnce would be gone so quickly. Can you fight these with any success in court?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode