^^AGREE^^
why do red light tickets not go on record?
- Thread starter WhyMe
- Start date
- Status
Kestas
Staff member
In general I've been mindful of red lights, stop signs, and freeway speed in recent times. There's been too much revenue enhancement in poorer communities.
For example, I often see police patrolling traffic in Michigan, but in South Florida I rarely see traffic patrols or traffic stops. South Florida has many wealthy people paying copious amounts of money for property tax to fund municipalities. Not so in Michigan.
For example, I often see police patrolling traffic in Michigan, but in South Florida I rarely see traffic patrols or traffic stops. South Florida has many wealthy people paying copious amounts of money for property tax to fund municipalities. Not so in Michigan.
^^ An excuse for not enforcing the law ^^
If you car drives through toll roads without paying the toll you get fined.
Why if you drive through a red light is that any different"
Im unsure why people are against enforcing the law, maybe if they lost a loved one because of someone running a red light, they would feel differently?
If you car drives through toll roads without paying the toll you get fined.
Why if you drive through a red light is that any different"
Im unsure why people are against enforcing the law, maybe if they lost a loved one because of someone running a red light, they would feel differently?
Originally Posted by alarmguy
^^ An excuse for not enforcing the law ^^
If you car drives through toll roads without paying the toll you get fined.
Why if you drive through a red light is that any different"
Im unsure why people are against enforcing the law, maybe if they lost a loved one because of someone running a red light, they would feel differently?
Blame that aggravating United States Constitution- particularly the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. All it does is protect scofflaws and obstruct the totalitarian schemes of the Safety Gestapo.
^^ An excuse for not enforcing the law ^^
If you car drives through toll roads without paying the toll you get fined.
Why if you drive through a red light is that any different"
Im unsure why people are against enforcing the law, maybe if they lost a loved one because of someone running a red light, they would feel differently?
Blame that aggravating United States Constitution- particularly the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. All it does is protect scofflaws and obstruct the totalitarian schemes of the Safety Gestapo.
There are no protections for vehicles on publicly-funded highways.
This is why traffic enforcement cameras are available to any municipality that wants them and currently being used in 23 states.
This is why traffic enforcement cameras are available to any municipality that wants them and currently being used in 23 states.
Last edited:
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
Originally Posted by Pew
Red light cams have been removed from most if not all City of Chicago streets after a lawsuit for the fact that you 1.) have the right to face your accuser and 2.) there's no way of knowing who was driving.
I'm not sure where you are getting that info from. Chicago is at the top of the list of number of red light and speed cameras. 300 intersection cameras at least. You can read more about this program here: Chicago Red Light Camera Program
They've had the usual corruption and kickback issues with it, as is typical of Chicago, but the program remains.
Red light cams have been removed from most if not all City of Chicago streets after a lawsuit for the fact that you 1.) have the right to face your accuser and 2.) there's no way of knowing who was driving.
I'm not sure where you are getting that info from. Chicago is at the top of the list of number of red light and speed cameras. 300 intersection cameras at least. You can read more about this program here: Chicago Red Light Camera Program
They've had the usual corruption and kickback issues with it, as is typical of Chicago, but the program remains.
Originally Posted by WhyMe
in my state of Wa, red light ticket do not go on one record. of course every state is different, but i always wondered why they don't go on ones driving record. Seems like just a money grab then
Got it on the first try!
in my state of Wa, red light ticket do not go on one record. of course every state is different, but i always wondered why they don't go on ones driving record. Seems like just a money grab then
Got it on the first try!
Originally Posted by MCompact
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by MCompact
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Indeed! Although I try to obey the limit on non-highways, I sometimes wonder why we can't have some of the more open highways be a bit more... "reasonable and prudent". [My younger coworkers don't know what that phrase means, and why I really wanted a road trip out to Montana in the late '90's.] Then again, I already drive my cars to their natural limits, just keeping up with traffic around here.
Originally Posted by MCompact
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Indeed! Although I try to obey the limit on non-highways, I sometimes wonder why we can't have some of the more open highways be a bit more... "reasonable and prudent". [My younger coworkers don't know what that phrase means, and why I really wanted a road trip out to Montana in the late '90's.] Then again, I already drive my cars to their natural limits, just keeping up with traffic around here.
The ticket is legal, and it is against the owner of the car. Doesn't matter who is driving, the owner is on the hook for the fine. They may not be going aggressively after the owners to pay up, but they are within their rights to pull out all of the stops if they wanted to. The only thing stopping them now is the political back lash.
I expect that to change someday as governments want any and all money that can be extracted from their residents and visitors without political penalties, such as being voted out of office. That is the only real defense citizens have against these money grabs.
I expect that to change someday as governments want any and all money that can be extracted from their residents and visitors without political penalties, such as being voted out of office. That is the only real defense citizens have against these money grabs.
Originally Posted by SeaJay
The ticket is legal, and it is against the owner of the car. Doesn't matter who is driving, the owner is on the hook for the fine. They may not be going aggressively after the owners to pay up, but they are within their rights to pull out all of the stops if they wanted to. The only thing stopping them now is the political back lash.
I expect that to change someday as governments want any and all money that can be extracted from their residents and visitors without political penalties, such as being voted out of office. That is the only real defense citizens have against these money grabs.
So what's the point of the driving license then and why stop at red light tickets?
The ticket is legal, and it is against the owner of the car. Doesn't matter who is driving, the owner is on the hook for the fine. They may not be going aggressively after the owners to pay up, but they are within their rights to pull out all of the stops if they wanted to. The only thing stopping them now is the political back lash.
I expect that to change someday as governments want any and all money that can be extracted from their residents and visitors without political penalties, such as being voted out of office. That is the only real defense citizens have against these money grabs.
So what's the point of the driving license then and why stop at red light tickets?
Originally Posted by supton
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by MCompact
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Indeed! Although I try to obey the limit on non-highways, I sometimes wonder why we can't have some of the more open highways be a bit more... "reasonable and prudent". [My younger coworkers don't know what that phrase means, and why I really wanted a road trip out to Montana in the late '90's.] Then again, I already drive my cars to their natural limits, just keeping up with traffic around here.
Hahaha..I actually got a ticket in MT. I was headed up to Kalispell and a trooper tagged me doing just under a hundred (i was young). It was spendy too..but I couldn't complain because he could have wrote it up as a more severe infraction, something like negligent or reckless driving IIRC. That would have hurt the insurance and i think it could have led to a possible suspension of my license.
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by MCompact
Lots of states don't treat speeding and other minor infractions as criminal cases, meaning that the constitutional safeguards don't apply. The goal is to facilitate revenue collection.
In Kentucky you can still request a jury trial for any traffic infraction, and the fines and the majority of court costs go to the state- meaning there is no financial incentive to convict.
When I was a judge in traffic court I was the toughest on the defendants who were speeding in active school zones or construction zones, as well as congested residential streets. That said, I didn't think a guy going 100 mph on a deserted interstate at 3:00 AM was a big deal.
My chief traffic prosecutor-who shared my philosophy-had a Mustang GT and an extremely heavy right foot; she also wound up being elected judge. She replaced a guy who thought that you risked certain death if you drove 1 mph over 55(he drove a grungy Malibu wagon and a Cavalier, so his fear may have been well founded).
And she and I both believed that anyone caught camping out in the left lane should be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
At a minimum.
I wish more people shared this mentality.
Indeed! Although I try to obey the limit on non-highways, I sometimes wonder why we can't have some of the more open highways be a bit more... "reasonable and prudent". [My younger coworkers don't know what that phrase means, and why I really wanted a road trip out to Montana in the late '90's.] Then again, I already drive my cars to their natural limits, just keeping up with traffic around here.
Hahaha..I actually got a ticket in MT. I was headed up to Kalispell and a trooper tagged me doing just under a hundred (i was young). It was spendy too..but I couldn't complain because he could have wrote it up as a more severe infraction, something like negligent or reckless driving IIRC. That would have hurt the insurance and i think it could have led to a possible suspension of my license.
Originally Posted by KrisZ
So what's the point of the driving license then and why stop at red light tickets?
If the only way to get a ticket were cameras, then you are correct as there would be no point of getting a license. You are also correct that they could start fining other driving violations (by fining the owner) with cameras.
But there still are LEO's on the road that will stop a car running red lights, speeding, etc. In that circumstance the driver needs a license otherwise will face additional charges.
So what's the point of the driving license then and why stop at red light tickets?
If the only way to get a ticket were cameras, then you are correct as there would be no point of getting a license. You are also correct that they could start fining other driving violations (by fining the owner) with cameras.
But there still are LEO's on the road that will stop a car running red lights, speeding, etc. In that circumstance the driver needs a license otherwise will face additional charges.
Around here they don't bother coming after you if you don't pay a moving violation but they issue a warrant and the next time you get pulled over they run a check and at that time they can arrest you if you have an outstanding warrant. This happened to a friend of mine, he didn't pay a speeding ticket and then several years later he got pulled over for speeding and the officer thru him in jail.
Originally Posted by Duffyjr
Around here they don't bother coming after you if you don't pay a moving violation but they issue a warrant and the next time you get pulled over they run a check and at that time they can arrest you if you have an outstanding warrant. This happened to a friend of mine, he didn't pay a speeding ticket and then several years later he got pulled over for speeding and the officer thru him in jail.
That's one way to get your attention....
Around here they don't bother coming after you if you don't pay a moving violation but they issue a warrant and the next time you get pulled over they run a check and at that time they can arrest you if you have an outstanding warrant. This happened to a friend of mine, he didn't pay a speeding ticket and then several years later he got pulled over for speeding and the officer thru him in jail.
That's one way to get your attention....
Up here it goes against the RO as you cant prove who was even driving. We also have RO liable tickets for just about everything. You registered the vehicle, you are responsible for who drives it.
- Status
Similar threads
