823
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
823 points (89.3% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
8965 readers
746 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Those cameras wouldn't be needed if people didn't drive so fast it endangers the people around them.
The many decades cars existed before those cameras also had speeders.
And they were dangerous idiots back then. Be glad there's finally an automated way to catch them instead of relying on a biased cop to be here.
The 'automated way' can be miscalibrated or just malfunctioning. What are you going to do when you go legally through a green light but the camera says you didn't?
You have recourses. People fight tickets all the time.
How do you convince a judge that the photo they are looking at is a lie?
The pictures are worthless if you don't see the light on them.
And yet, many don't.
And then there are cases like this- https://abc7chicago.com/rosemont-red-light-camera-violation-village-of/10892854/
I like how the link you post is about someone wrongly given a citation and they were cleared in the end.
Yes, that is the point. They had to get cleared. It took time and effort despite the fact that they were totally innocent. They could have lost out on pay because they had to take unpaid time off to deal with this.
Why should that have to be the case ever?
What do you think happens when a cop makes a mistake, which is more likely to happen than an automated camera?
When a cop makes a mistake, they don't have a photo that "proves" it isn't a mistake. So you at least have a better chance with the right judge.
While I hate photo enforcement as much as the next guy, this is a piss poor argument against it. Have you never been fucked over by a lying cop? I have. Camera tickets are way easier to fight.
Sure. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, with the right judge, you have a better chance fighting a red light ticket with a cop than you do with a photo which "proves" you did it. Even if it's a small chance, it's still a better chance.
It's not though. At least in my jurisdiction, a traffic ticket can't be acted on unless it's given in person - so in the case of photo enforcement, you just don't respond. Then it's just a matter of dodging the process server, if they even bother hiring one, which they often won't when there's plenty of low hanging fruit.