Fighting Camera Tickets?
- Thread starter mustangcy
- Start date
I think the difference we aren't agreeing on is there aren't two types of parking tickets, while speeding tickets from police vs cameras are. They had to make up a new process to bring in the camera revenue. And now that the DOT is in charge of regulating where cameras can be for safety reasons on highways, cities refuse to follow these rules because they will lose the revenue.
I always speed (unlike the OP) and I've driven that stretch of road on average twice daily since the cameras were put up and never gotten a ticket there - 12 over is actually a lot.
The one camera ticket I got was at the intersection with the cameras I driver through the least - Williams and 16th in SW.
If it's truly a moral thing for you, and you admit to going 5 over, have you turned yourself in?
Again with the assigning of motives - assuming that local police don't have safety in mind, they only care about revenue. It's really demeaning.
That's right. Police officers are not people, and aren't subject to the normal conditions of the rest of us average humans.
Wow people sure have strong feelings about speeding here. Speed limits are designed for the lowest common denominator of drivers. If it’s 30 mph or lower I’ll go about 5 over, anything higher 5-10, and like 15 on the interstate. I also won’t whine if I get a ticket though, but have only had like 3 in my life.
A ton of us have driven the interstate between DSM and Ames, and everyone goes 10-15 over on there.
A ton of us have driven the interstate between DSM and Ames, and everyone goes 10-15 over on there.
Do you work for the city? City officials have basically admitted it is all about money.
and that's why the appeals process, etc is in place. But the default assumption that ALL police departments value money about safety is just ... insulting.
Well, the motives were clear when Clive decided to take down their red light cameras. One councilman openly complained that they had already budgeted for spending the camera revenues that were going to be lost.
For it to be immoral, it does not need to be "all" or "many", it just needs to be a potential conflict of interest.
No, I don't work for the city. I have seem presentations by the police department on the safety gains from the cameras - but more importantly I've seen first hand how much safer those stretches of roads are.
I drive 35 between Ames and Ankeny every day doing 78 when I'm not stuck between lines of traffic (ha!). Going 85 on that stretch is a great way to end up in an accident
That is not the point. I have not gotten a ticket. He has. If I would have gotten a ticket and it was legitimate then yes I would pay it and probably adjust my habits at least in that area (the intent of fines and what not).
Actually ive gotten one speeding ticket and one "Keeping downtown des moines safe" ticket from stopping over the line. I didn't pay either one and no consequences after you send a letter back saying I wasn't driving and I wont incriminate anyone else.
So you only believe in morals if you get caught. Otherwise, everything is free game. Understood.
In my experience in driving around extensively for the last twenty years (my job generally requires or has required a lot of driving), people driving 10-15 over the speed limit are less of a safety hazard than people driving 10 under.
Any potential conflict of interest is immoral? huh? I'm really lost with the anti-police rhetoric coming from the right on this topic. It seems so weird.
Creating a huge automatic revenue generating system that unquestionably benefits law enforcement budgets is not just a potential conflict of interest. And it's not anti-police, it's anti-police state, or anti-overbearing government. The subservience of some on this topic has not surprised me in the least.
