Red light cameras, next phase: the school bus

[DJofSD]

http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/19/watch-school-bus-camera-get-ticket/

Watch Out: This School Bus Camera Could Get You a Ticket

Better be extra cautious when passing a school bus.

Redflex Traffic Systems is partnering with 19 Virginia school districts to install cameras on buses to catch drivers who ignore their stop signs.

The cameras would be installed about six feet behind the bus’ stop-arm to monitor traffic in both directions. The system activates when the stop arm and red lights are displayed and children are entering or exiting the bus.

Evidence of violations gathered by Redflex, including video and high-resolution images, is sent to local law enforcement to review and determine whether a violation occurred and whether a driver should be cited. Redflex prints the citation and mails it to the car’s registered owner.

But is it Redflex’s job to issue such a citation?

I wonder if any one has mooned these yet?

Maybe Google can use these new cameras for Google Earth.

[Tom]

Next up - drones launch off the top of the school bus and take out the offenders' cars.

[Robert Goren]

It is pretty tough to feel sorry for one of the lowlifes that ignore a school bus's stop sign and put children at risk.

[Grits]

I read the piece. I don't understand why this would bother anyone--especially a parent. If the government (local or fed) was providing this there would be complaints galore. The private sector does so, there's still complaining? Wow.

Last year, in a nearby neighborhood on a two lane street, a woman passed a stopped school bus--she hit an elementary aged child. The child died hours later.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I read the piece. I don't understand why this would bother anyone--especially a parent. If the government (local or fed) was providing this there would be complaints galore. The private sector does so, there's still complaining? Wow.

Last year, in a nearby neighborhood on a two lane street, a woman passed a stopped school bus--she hit an elementary aged child. The child died hours later.

Agree with you.

Paranoia explains the opposition.

[Tom]

No one has an expectation of privacy on the public roads.
I think cameras in certain situations are a good idea.

[JustRalph]

Ever heard of the sixth amendment?

[Tom]

I don't think it applies to traffic laws.
No one has a right to drive. We agree to the rules when we get a license.
This is local level stuff.

[Actor]

A city near my home installed such a system at stop lights. It was challenged on three points.

The person cited had no opportunity to challenge the citation until after he/she had paid the fine, deemed a denial of due process.
The citation was issued to the owner of the car with no attempt to identify the driver.
The company owning the cameras had no authority to issue the citation.
Through petition (good ol' first amendment) the issue was put on the ballot and the cameras were voted down. The legal case came to an end since the court deemed the question moot.

[Grits]

These were installed in my city at more than one intersection on busy streets. I ran the stop light. No doubt, I tried to make it under caution. The photo came in the mail. Yes, my car, my tags. No one drives it but myself. No points, no insurance increase, etc. Paid it. The cameras, now removed--maybe challenged, as you noted.

Last summer, coming around Baltimore, traveling 62 in a 55 work zone on I-95. Letter/ticket arrived at my office a few days after I returned home. No points, no insurance increase, etc. Paid it. Sending a nice check to Maryland. As you note, "pay the fine" and all is well--after the fact.

I look at this in a totally different manner. Where children are concerned, I have no problem whatsoever. Passing a stopped school bus is the WORST of mistakes.

[JustRalph]

I don't think it applies to traffic laws.
No one has a right to drive. We agree to the rules when we get a license.
This is local level stuff.

The 6th amendment applies to traffic violations. That's why if the police don't show up for court, you get off. The 6 th Amendment guarantees your right to face/cross exam your accuser. If your accuser doesn't show, you can't cross examine, case dismissed. You cannot cross examine a camera. That's why they make traffic camera fines "administrative" violations. Not criminal violations.

It's a ****ing racket!!!

[JustRalph]

Last summer, coming around Baltimore, traveling 62 in a 55 work zone on I-95. Letter/ticket arrived at my office a few days after I returned home. No points, no insurance increase, etc.

No points etc because it's an "administrative" citation. It would be illegal to put points on your license. Points are part and parcel to "police powers" which a camera cannot possess. You can't swear in a damn camera!

[Grits]

The 6th amendment applies to traffic violations. That's why if the police don't show up for court, you get off. The 6 th Amendment guarantees your right to face/cross exam your accuser. If your accuser doesn't show, you can't cross examine, case dismissed. You cannot cross examine a camera. That's why they make traffic camera fines "administrative" violations. Not criminal violations.

It's a ****ing racket!!!

JR, I wish I'd known this in 2012 when I had to make two court appearances in Scoharie county, west of Saratoga. It cost me a few hundred when my speeding ticket was reduced to a nonmoving violation--how I don't know! Again, no points, no insurance increase.

It could've been dismissed because the NYS trooper didn't show either time? Funny, the judge didn't tell me this. I was upset, so scared I was going to lose my license. I was seriously flying ... passing a truck. :faint:

[Stillriledup]

I read the piece. I don't understand why this would bother anyone--especially a parent. If the government (local or fed) was providing this there would be complaints galore. The private sector does so, there's still complaining? Wow.

Last year, in a nearby neighborhood on a two lane street, a woman passed a stopped school bus--she hit an elementary aged child. The child died hours later.

You don't understand why a police state in America would bother anyone?

[PaceAdvantage]

You don't understand why a police state in America would bother anyone?You (and especially Whiff Whizz) don't understand why some people don't appreciate your full talents as a poster here, after inane questions like this? :lol:

[Grits]

You don't understand why a police state in America would bother anyone?

Care nothing about children, huh???

[NJ Stinks]

It's a ****ing racket!!!

Agreed. I hate how these traffic cameras are multiplying almost everywhere.

Take away the revenue and the cameras would disappear tomorrow.

(School bus cameras I'm OK with. Any fool who passes a stopped school bus deserves to be fried.)

[PaceAdvantage]

To play devil's advocate, one could justify the traffic cameras as life saving and thus child saving as well. Children have been hit by cars crossing intersections by drivers running red lights.

[Tom]

NJ, you say if the money went away, so would the cameras.
But then the money would have to come from taxes.

Isn't it better to penalize those who abuse the system rather than hit
everyone who obeys the laws?

[Grits]

To play devil's advocate, one could justify the traffic cameras as life saving and thus child saving as well. Children have been hit by cars crossing intersections by drivers running red lights.

This is why I paid the violations. I don't care who owns or monitors the cameras. Yes, I could go to court and claim, "no, that wasn't me driving, etc." But, why? I'm not a liar, so I pay the fine. Same goes for the work zone in Baltimore, where the speed limit was up/down/up--65/55/65. My error.

Cameras, whether they are for traffic, for children, for adults, in public areas--wherever--they do not bother me. On the street, in malls, in schools, in parks, airports, all public places. I feel they are for my safety, and more importantly, for the safety of children. I may sound hard, but its my belief--if you place a child at risk--you have NO rights. You're history.

Everything changed with 9-11. Cameras are part of life now. How quickly did they help identify the bombers in Boston? If that were your 11 year old son that died in Boston would you declare where you live a police state? If you're that paranoid it might be better to turn off our pc and your phone. Cameras in public areas divulge far less. JMO.

[cj's dad]

You (and especially Whiff Whizz) don't understand why some people don't appreciate your full talents as a poster here, after inane questions like this? :lol:

How did my step-son, I mean Whiz get dragged into this ??

[Stillriledup]

Care nothing about children, huh???

I'm sure the children that are children now would appreciate adults fighting for their freedoms and making sure they don't live in the police state that this government is trying to implement.

Maybe we ought to plant a chip in each child's body at birth, you know, in the name of safety, that way, big brother can monitor his every move, that would be much safer than a camera on a bus, don't you think?

[NJ Stinks]

NJ, you say if the money went away, so would the cameras.
But then the money would have to come from taxes.

Isn't it better to penalize those who abuse the system rather than hit
everyone who obeys the laws?

The problem is, for example, that I don't consider somebody going 75 mph on the NJ Turnpike or Parkway abusing anything even though the speed limit is 65. Nor do I consider somebody who does not come to a full stop before turning right to be an abuser. Worse yet, I know a guy who was fined via a camera picture because although he actually did come to a full stop before turning right on red, his front tires were over the stop line when he made the complete stop. That "violation" cost him around $100 bucks.

Now if conditions exist that make 75 excessive or a right turn on red a perilous move, a cop will know it and will issue a summons. Just like they did for years and years in the past.

[PaceAdvantage]

How did my step-son, I mean Whiz get dragged into this ??In another thread, he was touting SRU as the be-all end-all of posters here...and he couldn't understand why anyone would have a bad word to say about him... :lol:

[Robert Fischer]

Too much for-profit traffic police work.
It's unethical in my opinion when a cop or camera sits in a hiding place in an area where the road design creates a flow of traffic faster or different than the posted speed limits and traffic rules.

Something like a bus stop-sign camera sounds like a good thing. If they make an effort to eliminate the grey-areas and focus on egregious violators, then yes it's a public service. If they push and expand the grey-areas in the name of "child safety" in order to maximize profits, it starts to become unethical.

And people can't drive either. A lot of people are just really bad drivers who lack both the ability to drive safely and to use common sense, and they ruin it for those who have those abilities by justifying lawmaking geared toward the lowest common denominator.


I must be getting old. [/rant]