
How to Beat a Photo-Enforced Speeding Ticket or Red Light Ticket - bado
http://www.minds.com/blog/view/257176092094238720/how-to-beat-a-photo-enforced-speeding-ticket-or-red-light-ticket
======
mehwoot
How many people honestly find the attitude that "I can get away with it,
therefore it is ok to do" acceptable?

Yeah, they can't prove it was you, but we both know that you were speeding.
Furthermore since it is your car, in 99% of cases it is either you or someone
you lent your car to.

Would this be different if it was a drink driving case? I'm sorry, but for all
your opinion on why it's legal for you to do this, I think you're a fucking
douchebag.

~~~
coralreef
What good are your legal rights if you refuse to exercise them?

~~~
mehwoot
Yeah, cause not using your legal rights to escape punishment when you are
guilty is exactly the same as not exercising them when you are innocent.

This attitude actually erodes our legal rights, because it causes police
officers, judges and jurors to have less reason to think people are acting in
good faith when they exercise their rights, causing innocent people to be
found guilty and eventually leading to these rights being weakened by having
the law change.

~~~
coralreef
_This attitude actually erodes our legal rights, because it causes police
officers, judges and jurors to have less reason to think people are acting in
good faith when they exercise their rights, causing innocent people to be
found guilty and eventually leading to these rights being weakened by having
the law change._

Innocent people around found guilty because they think they have nothing to
hide, they make statements that inadvertently end up hurting them, and the
police or prosecutors do not care.

It is called an adversarial system for a reason; they are not on your side.
And news flash: police can/have been dishonest, will lie to suspects, etc.

"Good faith" has nothing to do with exercising your rights. Being guilty or
innocent has nothing to do with your rights. You are entitled to your rights
regardless. Your idea of judges and jurors being jaded by guilty people
pleading innocent is not real.

~~~
mehwoot
None of that applies in this case though. There are states where the law is,
if it is your car, you pay the fine. It is that way exactly because people
like this dude will try and get out of paying the fine, and so the law has had
to be changed.

That means, in the rare occurrence that you actually were not driving your car
and you don't know who was (and it wasn't stolen, that you know of), you have
no way to get out of your ticket.

This type of behavior has directly led to a situation where innocent people
have lost their rights.

 _Your idea of judges and jurors being jaded by guilty people pleading
innocent is not real._

Ok, so explain why states have laws where you must show you reported your car
stolen to get out of a ticket? What would be the point of that, except if
people who were guilty were using such arguments as these to get out of
tickets? Laws restricting rights like this _are enacted all the freaking time
because of behavior like this article_.

~~~
coralreef
What are you asking me? States put laws together for any variety of motives.
Did it occur to you that the law was put together because states enjoy the
income driven by automated ticketing? Are you seriously trying to argue that
the government takes away rights and freedoms because people keep excercising
them when the gov prosecutes them?

------
tedks
1\. Drive a car with enough Ron Paul bumper stickers to create a local
gravitational distortion and bend light away from your license plate. Which
you only have because government FATCATS force you to REGISTER impeding your
natural right of FREE MOTION! Fascists.

2\. When issued a ticket because you were going 70 in a 45mph zone (presumably
because driving as fast as possible is what segregates the Men of Action from
the taker scum), respond with the most passive-aggressive note possible,
citing every single Bill of Rights item (it'll be hard to connect your camera
ticket to quartering, but you've got enough Ron Paul quotes to find a way).

3\. After producing enough laughter to lighten the entire week of a DC
government schlub and her entire cubicle farm (not to mention the years of
entertainment they'll get from putting your absurd essay on the immorality of
the very concept of a "speed" "limit" and the gross infringement on the
natural right of man to drive as fast as possible, as far as possible, in
order to demonstrate his mastery over the laws of nature just as chain-smoking
demonstrated the Objectivists' mastery over fire), get waived out so that you
don't fill up an hour of a judges time (again) with an "opening statement"
that reads the entire Wikipedia page on Ayn Rand into the court record.

------
doughj3
First of all, this doesn't work everywhere since some jurisdictions have joint
liability for the registered owner and driver[1] and some don't care at all
and the registered owner is ticketed regardless of the driver (protip- don't
lend your car to people who break the law).

But secondly, reading the post it seems like OP did break the law and is
trying to get off on some technicality, which I admit I can't support. Sorry,
don't drive like a jerk if you don't want to deal with the consequences. While
fines might not discourage some people, points on the license tend to stop
repeat offenders.

[1]
[http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/auto_enforce.html](http://www.ghsa.org/html/stateinfo/laws/auto_enforce.html)

------
fiatmoney
There is a direct correspondence between:

\- Recording a license plate associated with some dubious activity, and then
ticketing the owner of the car; and

\- Recording an IP address associated with some dubious activity, and suing
(or worse) the person who pays for the internet connection.

There is a large and schizophrenic body of law about when an owner is
responsible for the operation of "their" machine, even if they're not doing
the immediate operating (going all the way back to "who pays the man gored by
a rented ox"). With automated systems subject to shitty algorithms the problem
becomes much more acute but it is by no means a new problem.

------
gmays
>"Sincerely,

Nathan Cox United States Army Veteran"

I find it annoying when vets use their service to get out of stuff, get free
stuff, etc. as if we're owed something. It's a privilege to serve and it's
voluntary. Act like it.

> "I am in the habit of not taking “plea deals”, and I am always in the habit
> of fighting my tickets...so I don’t have to go to court... I just about
> always record my interactions with the police..."

Dude, how often does this guy get tickets and/or stopped by the police? I've
been stopped maybe three times in my life. And I'm black. He sounds like a
jackass.

We live in a very generous and trusting society in many respects, thus the
flexibility. Use it when you need to, but don't take advantage of it.

------
jacknews
Um, so was this guy actually driving his car when it was photographed
speeding, or not? He doesn't say, but I'm guessing yes.

And so this post is simply a tip on how to break the law and get away with it?

That may be fine (sorry!) if it were a useless and unfair law[1]. Perhaps that
is the case with speed limits on some sections of road, which seem designed to
gather revenue rather than enhance safety.

But in general I find speeding to be a fairly selfish and not very useful
crime. It doesn't really speed journey times significantly, but puts other
road users at greater risk of iinjury or even death.

\--

[1] _It may be ok to ignore stupid laws, under some moral frameworks. Though,
if you 're not going to follow the actual law, what are you going to follow?
How does society function when people have different ideas of right?_

~~~
coralreef
Its protest against unfair implementation. You can't charge a person with a
crime when you can't even identify that person. But thats what the government
is doing. And people are scared enough (or ignorant of their rights) that they
simply submit.

~~~
doughj3
People aren't "scared enough" that they submit, they submit because they have
been _caught_.

I'm not sure what makes an automated radar with a camera any different than a
state trooper holding a radar gun, can you elaborate why that's an "unfair"?

~~~
coralreef
An officer pulls you over, takes your license and registration, physically
identifies you and can testify in court should you challenge the ticket.

------
bsirkia
Very interesting. The only thing I don't get is that if the government knows
it can't enforce these red-light and speeding camera tickets, why implement
them? Is it really because they know that the majority of people will just pay
and not fight it?

~~~
IbJacked
Yes, exactly that. It's a sizable revenue stream.

