How to Beat a Photo-Enforced Speeding Ticket

[Gut4Tennis]

Last year I received a letter in the mail from the Washington D.C DMV claiming I was speeding. As you can see it was one of those Photo-Enforced Speeding Tickets and they had multiple pictures of my CAR. I knew better to just submit and pay a fine like the majority of people do in this country, unfortunately. I am in the habit of not taking “plea deals”, and I am always in the habit of fighting my tickets and NOT pre-paying them so I don’t have to go to court – like many folks do. I just about always record my interactions with the police, whether it’s a traffic stop or not, that way it keeps the entire situation objective, transparent and I can hold the public servant accountable if he/ she violates my rights.

more at link
http://www.minds.com/blog/view/2571...-enforced-speeding-ticket-or-red-light-ticket

 

[sureshs]

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

By speeding and then contesting your ticket, you are not proving your freedom or doing something heroic, like smokers would claim in the old days. You are trampling on the freedom of others to drive without fear of being hit by a speeder.

I have strong opinions about this, having been rear-ended by a speeder in 2003 and still getting some aches here and there because of that. I am alive today only because of seat belts and air bags.

The culture of thinking that pressing the gas pedal harder is a manly heroic thing to do has become ingrained, as well as the pride that comes with getting away with it, which is actually an example of cowardice. It is far more heroic to walk or bike for an hour to prove your freedom and courage.

 

[r2473]

Have to disagree with you sureshs.

The safest speed to drive is "the speed of traffic". If the speed limit is 65, but everyone (in your lane) is going 80, then you should drive 80. Not 90. Not 55.

 

[woodrow1029]

Go to Youtube and look up "FreeKeene". That is another moron that just thinks they can do whatever they want and not take responsibility for their actions. Doesn't work out for them very much though.

 

[woodrow1029]

Have to disagree with you sureshs.

The safest speed to drive is "the speed of traffic". If the speed limit is 65, but everyone (in your lane) is going 80, then you should drive 80. Not 90. Not 55.

To a certain extent you are correct. That is why usually if the speed limit is 65, the "flow of traffic" is generally between 65-75, and usually if you are going in the 66-75 range, you are not in danger of getting pulled over. The problem is the idiots that are driving 80-90 that think that just because it may be a straight stretch of road they can do whatever they want regardless of the others on the road.

 

[r2473]

^^ The guys that drive 55 in the same situation are often as dangerous as the guys driving 90.

Safe driving is more about "predictability" than following rules.

 

[sureshs]

Have to disagree with you sureshs.

The safest speed to drive is "the speed of traffic". If the speed limit is 65, but everyone (in your lane) is going 80, then you should drive 80. Not 90. Not 55.

He is talking about photo-enforced tickets inside a city, which are usually at traffic lights.

 

[sureshs]

^^ The guys that drive 55 in the same situation are often as dangerous as the guys driving 90.

Safe driving is more about "predictability" than following rules.

Well, the problem is the guys driving 90. We have accepted that as OK, and then we reason from that as if it is a right to drive at 90.

Following the average speed up until 80 seems OK to me, but not higher than that.

Running red lights is one of the biggest problems, but the traffic light cameras are now being withdrawn. Some of them used to flash brightly, blinding the drivers. Then in some cases drivers panicked when they realized there were cameras, and try to speed up at the last minute, causing rear endings. And then there are the privacy advocates of course.

 

[r2473]

He is talking about photo-enforced tickets inside a city, which are usually at traffic lights.

Even on city streets, same rules apply IMO. The main streets where the speed limit is 40, most people drive closer to 50.

In reality, it is best to realize that a certain percentage of the population will be driving dangerously at any given time. You can't do anything about it. All you can do is be aware and be prepared to react. And drive as predictably as you can.

 

[sureshs]

The solution is to take humans out of the driving business. They have proven to be unfit for it, mentally and physically. The solution is Google cars which drive themselves.

 

[r2473]

I am in the habit of not taking “plea deals”, and I am always in the habit of fighting my tickets and NOT pre-paying them so I don’t have to go to court – like many folks do. I just about always record my interactions with the police, whether it’s a traffic stop or not, that way it keeps the entire situation objective, transparent and I can hold the public servant accountable if he/ she violates my rights.

Sounds like you have all the angles covered.

Myself, I'm in the habit of simply not getting tickets in the first place.

 

[sureshs]

In reality, it is best to realize that a certain percentage of the population will be driving dangerously at any given time. You can't do anything about it.

Of course you can. By making sure that you are willing to pay more taxes for more patrol officers and driver education, and support tougher penalties for speeders. Slap a speeder with a $1000 ticket and he will feel the pain for life. Remember, most people do not change unless they are compelled to change.

 

[r2473]

I mean you can't do anything about it in a practical sense.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

The state only has jurisdiction over matters of commerce. The circumstantial evidence that you were doing commerce is your drivers license. However that is only circumstantial kinda like being charged with poaching just because you have a hunting license and were target shooting.
The state has jurisdiction over commerce (fed ex people, truck drivers, etc) not joe public traveling from point A to B in his inherent capacity to travel freely on the public roads held IN TRUST by the state. They are the trustee (employee). You are the owner/ the boss of them. You elect their bosses.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

I got a photo red light ticket. I contend that it is not me. My face is nowhere on their "evidence". And here's the kicker: if I say it wasn't me driving they want ME to submit a paper saying that it was someone else! I don't have to give them squat. 5th amendment.
It's only $75, but I'm fighting it, and I will win. I already sent them a letter stating that they should drop it since the burden of proof is on them, and I have the right to face my accuser, of which there is none, and they have NO evidence that it was actually me, and I don't have to prove my innocence, they have to prove my guilt, and they can't. You can't even see my plates from the pics they sent me. And you certainly can't see my face

Red light cameras are unconstitutional.

It's only $75, but that's part of the scam. They figure nobody will fight for $75. But I will, out of principle.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

They're called "snitch tickets".

They play the odds that people snitch on themselves and pay, equating to submission of guilt and easy revenue.

If you read the fine print at the bottom of these snitch tickets, more often than not, you'll be able to find disclaimer that the whole cloak and dagger operation is run by private third parties on behalf of the municipalities.

The third party is contracted to set up their equipment and operate it. Third party sends the snitch tickets on behalf of the municipality.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

6th is the right to face federal accuser. 14th is the right to face state and local accusers. We have cameras here and the "fine" is a civil penalty. So this wouldn't even apply as the infraction is never reported to the DOT.

these cameras are digital, ie the photo detector is a silicon array. Silicon has peak sensitivity in the infra red. If you build an LED illuminator for the plate using IR LEDs the camera will be over exposed. Your plate will be lost in bright light.

Kansas City has red light cameras and they are a pain in the ***. Skid marks can be found at all of them, and there are times the intersections get messed up and people get stuck out in them. (This happened to me when making a left turn. 2 cars ahead was a cop car and he stopped right in the middle of the road and we were all screwed.) They're supposed to "reduce accidents" but they don't. You just get more people rear ending each other.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

I received a red-light camera ticket in Seattle. I recall the incident. The light went yellow as I was nearly to the intersection, and I was the only vehicle in sight. I had a choice of slamming my breaks and waiting for two minutes, or continuing on my merry way, no harm, no foul.

I actually read the fine print on the ticket. It stated that failure to pay would only result in collection efforts--no points or suspension.

I use the letter as a cookbook-mark. I did get two letters from phony collection agencies, which went into the recycle bin.

 

[maggmaster]

I feel like this steps outside of the purpose of a police force. I would fight the ticket too.

 

[Ronaldo]

I feel like this steps outside of the purpose of a police force. I would fight the ticket too.

It's a sweet moneymaker.

 

[r2473]

I got a photo red light ticket. I contend that it is not me. My face is nowhere on their "evidence". And here's the kicker: if I say it wasn't me driving.....

Have you ever thought of just stopping for red lights? Seems a lot easier.

I received a red-light camera ticket in Seattle. I recall the incident. The light went yellow as I was nearly to the intersection, and I was the only vehicle in sight. I had a choice of slamming my breaks and waiting for two minutes, or continuing on my merry way, no harm, no foul.

Kansas City has red light cameras and they are a pain in the ***. Skid marks can be found at all of them, and there are times the intersections get messed up and people get stuck out in them.

This isn't really how they work. If you're not "racing" the light, you won't have a problem. You might just try slowing down a bit. Remember, there's another light just a block down the road (and another, and another, and another). You wont' gain much by speeding / running red lights or stop signs / rolling through without stopping when making a right turn, etc. (and pedestrians will thank you for stopping).

A great way to get to your destination earlier is to start out earlier and give yourself plenty of time. Less stressful too.

 

[Power Player]

In all seriousness, he has a point. For example, the state of FL makes a lot of money off these tickets. They shortened the length of the red lights as well which made news, since the general public was made unaware.

It is pretty easy to get nailed halfway through these lights sometimes due to traffic flow during certain hours.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

Have you ever thought of just stopping for red lights? Seems a lot easier.



This isn't really how they work. If you're not "racing" the light, you won't have a problem. You might just try slowing down a bit. Remember, there's another light just a block down the road (and another, and another, and another). You wont' gain much by speeding / running red lights or stop signs / rolling through without stopping when making a right turn, etc. (and pedestrians will thank you for stopping).

A great way to get to your destination earlier is to start out earlier and give yourself plenty of time. Less stressful too.

I drive very chill and relaxed but shizzle still happens

 

[jmnk]

While I'm not a big fan of those cameras, and I have also fought those tickets in the past with mixed results, your argument seems a bit invalid. As it is stated on the ticket, under the District Law, it is the --owner-- of the vehicle who is responsible for the ticket. You are the owner. As far as the law is concerned, this is fairly simple case, and I do not see how you can fight it based on the claim you were not a driver. Apparently the law gives you the option to prove you were not a driver, and shift the blame to someone else, but the burden is on you.

You may argue that the law itself is 'bad', but apparently elected officials voted on it, passed it, so technically speaking it is reflecting the wishes of the people in that District. The fact that you feel otherwise is, well, fine, but has no bearing on the fact you are liable.

 

[Bartelby]

And now for how to beat a life sentence for shop lifting?

 

[Mick]

They're called "snitch tickets".

They play the odds that people snitch on themselves and pay, equating to submission of guilt and easy revenue.

If you read the fine print at the bottom of these snitch tickets, more often than not, you'll be able to find disclaimer that the whole cloak and dagger operation is run by private third parties on behalf of the municipalities.

The third party is contracted to set up their equipment and operate it. Third party sends the snitch tickets on behalf of the municipality.

I got a running the red light ticket a few years back.
it was the new owner of that car who had committed the offense.
I wrote back, "the person in the picture is of another race" and they dismissed the ticket.

 

[North]

While I'm not a big fan of those cameras, and I have also fought those tickets in the past with mixed results, your argument seems a bit invalid. As it is stated on the ticket, under the District Law, it is the --owner-- of the vehicle who is responsible for the ticket. You are the owner. As far as the law is concerned, this is fairly simple case, and I do not see how you can fight it based on the claim you were not a driver. Apparently the law gives you the option to prove you were not a driver, and shift the blame to someone else, but the burden is on you.

You may argue that the law itself is 'bad', but apparently elected officials voted on it, passed it, so technically speaking it is reflecting the wishes of the people in that District. The fact that you feel otherwise is, well, fine, but has no bearing on the fact you are liable.

Yep, it is the owner who bears the consequences. Several municipalities have looked at police cars that get red light tickets and found that generally a little more than a third of them occur when the police are NOT engaged in pursuit or any other activity that requires exceeding the speed limit. The police do not have to pay the tickets because they don't own the police cars and there are no negative consequences for them.
The police officer friend who told me about that just laughed that they get off scot-free like that.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

I got a running the red light ticket a few years back.
it was the new owner of that car who had committed the offense.
I wrote back, "the person in the picture is of another race" and they dismissed the ticket.

very nice indeed

 

[Bartelby]

They probably dismissed the ticket because of the transfer of ownership.

I think the owner is responsible unless another person voluntarily assumes the penalty, so it really has nothing to do with what you look or don't look like in most places.

 

[Overdrive]

Post deleted