absolutely I support surveillance to stop terrorism.
I live in the Philly area and most, if not all, of those camera's are on city streets. Id much rather have my tax dollars going to police doing actual police work than having to sit at a light so douche bags don't run a red light. and getting money out of douche bags running said red lights allows for MORE police work by putting more money into the city.
i don't see an issue with a camera stopping people from running red lights. it just makes sense. how can anyone argue it's not a good thing is beyond me.
Moving violations are supposed to be given to the driver and go on the driver's record. The owner of the car may not be the driver. Drivers should not be ticketed without proof they were driving the car.
camera or no camera.
Most people who pay attention enough to know the cameras are there probably would never knowingly run a red light anyway
You make a good point about the driver's identity. It should be the driver and not the vehicle's owner who is punished.
I know in CA, where this event happened, that if the driver in the picture is not you, you do not end up paying the fine. You do have to go to court to have the judge note it is not you and dismiss. This is a hassle of course.
(I actually got one when I lived there and sold my car to the dealer when I got a new car. The person they sold it to went through a light but the DMV hadn't processed the change of ownership yet and I had to go to court. Judge looked at me, at the ticket and said 'Dismissed.' I didn't even have to/get to explain the scenario.)
I don't see a lot of difference between being pulled over and being caught on camera. At least if cameras are doing this job it frees up cops to protect and serve in more productive ways.
It addresses the faulty behavior right at the moment. Other people see if happening. There are a lot more positives out of a police officer stopping someone rather than sending a ticket in the mail. Likely the people don't even remember running the red light. Their is no behavior modification (or very little) from a red light camera. And that is, or should be, the entire goal. It's not to be punitive, it's to change people's behaviors.
I'm not sure that is true. I have been pulled over but have never gotten a ticket through the mail, so I don't know for sure. I almost feel like getting a ticket weeks later would be more effective because you would never again know if there was or was not a camera. You would always be wondering and maybe that would cause you to drive safer? I am not saying that is definitely true, just suggesting it as a possibility.
Trust me, if you study behavior, you would see that while getting a ticket from a cop or in the mail are both not effective at all, the immediate response of being stopped by a police officer has a much better likelyhood of effecting future behavior.
Comments
I know in CA, where this event happened, that if the driver in the picture is not you, you do not end up paying the fine. You do have to go to court to have the judge note it is not you and dismiss. This is a hassle of course.
(I actually got one when I lived there and sold my car to the dealer when I got a new car. The person they sold it to went through a light but the DMV hadn't processed the change of ownership yet and I had to go to court. Judge looked at me, at the ticket and said 'Dismissed.' I didn't even have to/get to explain the scenario.)
Trust me, if you study behavior, you would see that while getting a ticket from a cop or in the mail are both not effective at all, the immediate response of being stopped by a police officer has a much better likelyhood of effecting future behavior.