CA Bill AB-645

[soundman98]

what's really the difference in the official ticket cost between running a car with no plates, or obscured plates, and the speeding tickets?

chicago already has a similar program with 'school zones' and speed camera's in them. most of the zones are 4 or more blocks away from the nearest school to hit more traveled streets and increase their take rate.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

LOL, maybe he was. Also I feel bad about laughing at that.

True, no right to speed. Ditto running red lights. But it's not really about catching the violators. The unconstitutional part is lack of due process.

In general though, it's all just an excuse to increase monitoring of the population, which nobody should be in favor of.

Seems like it is about catching the violators. It is a trial program to see if it works. If it doesn't work then it isn't likely to continue. The fines start at $50 for first time offenses or free if someone is too poor to pay. It doesn't result in a point on someone's record. It is mostly a visual deterrent and inconvenience until they determine if it works. I don't see how it monitors the population any more than a cop looking out his patrol car. Less monitoring than that.

Apparently all they need is a corn maze and pumpkin patch on the side of a three lane highway for people to drive 45mph in a 65 causing bumper to bumper traffic for three miles. Maybe Denmark and Russian have the right idea:

https://www.theregister.com/2007/03/28/bikini_bandits/
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...n_3766356.html

Most states allow stop-light cameras and/or speed cameras, including Lantanafrs2's Florida. Some states have no laws. Some states prohibit them, so the verdict on whether they are constitutional or follow due process or not is a matter of opinion.

I'm one of these people that believe you have to pay to play. If you get caught then be a man, admit you were wrong and pay up. If I get caught with a turbo K24 under the hood, I'm not going to whine about it. I'm going to deal with it. If I get caught speeding or running a red light on camera, I'm not going to whine about it. I'm going to pay the bill.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

Not triggered at all, I enjoy this. Some pinhead who lives on Google search pukes out long winded posts and I respond to them. I can do this all day long

Me too. More stuff I Googled

Bill allowing camera enforcement of school zone speed limits signed into law
https://floridapolitics.com/archives...gned-into-law/

Florida is one of the most dangerous states for driving, a recent report shows
https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/transp...t-report-shows

One year, 56 red-light cameras, $10 million in tickets
The cameras have lost favor across the country, but Tampa leaders praise the city’s program as a useful tool to curb dangerous driving
https://www.tampabay.com/news/transp...e-road-safety/

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by soundman98

what's really the difference in the official ticket cost between running a car with no plates, or obscured plates, and the speeding tickets?

chicago already has a similar program with 'school zones' and speed camera's in them. most of the zones are 4 or more blocks away from the nearest school to hit more traveled streets and increase their take rate.

Depends on the state. It could be a fix-it-ticket or warning if there are good reasons, but if it is on a sports sedan involved in street racing or donuts then it most likely will be fully exercised. In California, I believe this is a $200 ticket for a first offense.

Most states have cameras. Only seven'ish have banned them. The fed could enact a law prohibiting speeding in excess of 15% over the speed limit or something by the DOT mandating cameras and GPS on new cars that detect the speed limit and govern the max speed accordingly. They could mandate a camera in the car to detect if someone is driving impaired, distracted or having a medical emergency to stop the car or to determine liability for infractions. Lucky for us Hoonigans that they don't.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Seems like it is about catching the violators. It is a trial program to see if it works.

Sorry, I was referring to the constitutional part. Yes it's about catching violators haha. But it's also bullcrap to say this is because of street racers when it's just gonna ding joe blow going 12 over with the flow of traffic.

If municipalities really want to rake in the dough while making the roads (that matter) considerably safer than perhaps officers should monitor and pull over speeders in residential neighborhoods. The F'ers that speed in my development...swear to God.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Most states allow stop-light cameras and/or speed cameras, including Lantanafrs2's Florida. Some states have no laws. Some states prohibit them, so the verdict on whether they are constitutional or follow due process or not is a matter of opinion.

Fun fact, it's always a matter of opinion. That's why we have courts.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Sorry, I was referring to the constitutional part. Yes it's about catching violators haha. But it's also bullcrap to say this is because of street racers when it's just gonna ding joe blow going 12 over with the flow of traffic.

If municipalities really want to rake in the dough while making the roads (that matter) considerably safer than perhaps officers should monitor and pull over speeders in residential neighborhoods. The F'ers that speed in my development...swear to God.

They could do a lot. DOT could mandate cameras to detect speed limit signs and govern the limit to 5 mph over. They could put a camera to stop the car if someone is distracted, inebriated, asleep or having a medical emergency.

It doesn’t take much for police to get a warrant if they suspect someone of speeding either. They could use GPS data on a phone, g-sensors, identification using LIDAR, etc. Plenty of data there to put someone behind bars if they were motivated.

We have a lot of 1am donuts in Chargers on the streets in my neighborhood, so hopefully they institute this all over and put cameras there. Dudes were doing donuts mid day in the middle of the intersection.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Spuds

Fun fact, it's always a matter of opinion. That's why we have courts.

Right, I was more referring to the universality of the ruling. To say something is unconstitutional is to suggest (IMO) that the ruling was decided at the federal level to apply universally.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

We have a lot of 1am donuts in Chargers on the streets in my neighborhood, so hopefully they institute this all over and put cameras there. Dudes were doing donuts mid day in the middle of the intersection.

I feel like for such things as obvious as that, no cameras needed lol. Also speed cameras aren't going to ticket people doing donuts.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

I feel like for such things as obvious as that, no cameras needed lol. Also speed cameras aren't going to ticket people doing donuts.

These one's aren't; they are just for going over 10 mph faster in a zone like 45 in a 35. Red light cameras probably capture donuts in intersections, but I don't know for sure. Seems like smart cameras are not too far off. It would be nice if every car was like a Tesla with a bunch of cameras. Anything egregious would just get sent to the local police of what the driver did or for anything it picks up that other drivers or pedestrians do. Just like how data can be used from phones to create live data on traffic congestion, I could imagine a future where cars are pinging an emergency or violation, and the feeds of passing cars gets sent to police for a live video of the scene or reconstruction. This is like 16 years old, but the idea of compiling pictures or video is interesting (see the section on the Notre Dame Cathedral).

[alex87f]

Those have been all over Europe for decades. They work well and are -mostly- always signaled a few hundred yards beforehand (the logic being they're in dangerous or speeding-prone places).

Europe reacts differently to speeding than the US though. Our limits are higher, but if the sign says 130kmh, people drive 130. And you get a fine if you're driving 131 (after deduction of the camera's 5-10% margin of error). In the US, things are ... different.

Regarding who's driving, the law in France is that you have a few days / weeks to say who was driving your car in case it wasn't you. That person can then agree or disagree. Not sure what happens in case both parties deny they were driving, although I've never heard of it happen. Pretty sure newer cameras can identify you as well.

[soundman98]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

These one's aren't; they are just for going over 10 mph faster in a zone like 45 in a 35. Red light cameras probably capture donuts in intersections, but I don't know for sure. Seems like smart cameras are not too far off. It would be nice if every car was like a Tesla with a bunch of cameras. Anything egregious would just get sent to the local police of what the driver did or for anything it picks up that other drivers or pedestrians do. Just like how data can be used from phones to create live data on traffic congestion, I could imagine a future where cars are pinging an emergency or violation, and the feeds of passing cars gets sent to police for a live video of the scene or reconstruction. This is like 16 years old, but the idea of compiling pictures or video is interesting (see the section on the Notre Dame Cathedral).

1984. it's doubleplus good!

[new2subaru]

Only reason I use maps on my phone

Red light camera ahead! Red light camera ahead! I don't recall what it says for speed traps. Technology will be beaten with more technology. It's a waste of money.

In my area we need a more VISIBLE police force. Not hiding from the public in blacked out SUV's. This does more to slow traffic down and stop crime than anything else IMO.

[dpfarr]

Nothing a bag with a bunch of ketchup in it can’t fix.