Red-light cameras ordered capped in Minneapolis; declared unconstitutional

The Shadoe · 03-15-2006, 09:19 PM

I think that having police on the streets does more good than having red-light cameras. Admittedly, I don't know how the budgets line themselves out, but I can see the argument being made that cameras can justify cutting down the police force.

I get worried in those in-between situations. Where you can't safely stop at yellow, but when going through the intersection the light turns red.

I do think that Alex (as well as the court) make the strongest point about having to prove that you are innocent. Innocent until proven guilty. If we want the system to be completely automated, there really is no way currently to positively identify the driver. And let's say that a camera did work in conjunction with a nearby squad car. What would be the point? The squad car can do that job without the camera. And from what I understand the cameras aren't cheap and a HUGE chunk of profits goes right back to the contractor.

Plus, don't people tend to drive better when they see a police car nearby? If someone doesn't know the camera even exists, it isn't going to do anything to correct a problem (however temporarily that may be). But if cops are around, people seem to be more alert and less sloppy about driving.

alphabassettgrrl · 03-16-2006, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Shadoe

I think that having police on the streets does more good than having red-light cameras.
...
Plus, don't people tend to drive better when they see a police car nearby? If someone doesn't know the camera even exists, it isn't going to do anything to correct a problem (however temporarily that may be). But if cops are around, people seem to be more alert and less sloppy about driving.

Eh, yes and no. I am amazed at the number of people who still drive like idiots even with a fully marked black-and-white sitting in full view.

Uh, I didn't see it.

Yeah, whatever. Enjoy your ticket. You'd think people would pay attention, but they don't. At least the cameras are visible. They're hard to miss, actually. Big ugly things.

03-15-2006, 09:19 PM	#1
The Shadoe Save Marshall Field's! Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Saint Paul, MN Posts: 72	I think that having police on the streets does more good than having red-light cameras. Admittedly, I don't know how the budgets line themselves out, but I can see the argument being made that cameras can justify cutting down the police force. I get worried in those in-between situations. Where you can't safely stop at yellow, but when going through the intersection the light turns red. I do think that Alex (as well as the court) make the strongest point about having to prove that you are innocent. Innocent until proven guilty. If we want the system to be completely automated, there really is no way currently to positively identify the driver. And let's say that a camera did work in conjunction with a nearby squad car. What would be the point? The squad car can do that job without the camera. And from what I understand the cameras aren't cheap and a HUGE chunk of profits goes right back to the contractor. Plus, don't people tend to drive better when they see a police car nearby? If someone doesn't know the camera even exists, it isn't going to do anything to correct a problem (however temporarily that may be). But if cops are around, people seem to be more alert and less sloppy about driving. __________________ I am The Shadoe.
	Submit to Quotes