| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| New Ruling Calls Into Question The Legality of Red-Light Cameras |
| 2010-02-23 |
| Red-light cameras have hovered over Aventura traffic intersections for more than a year, but a judge's ruling might put a stop to the surveillance. Where do I contribute to his campaign fund? Miami-Dade County Circuit Court Judge Jerald Bagley ruled Monday that Aventura could not use the cameras to catch and ticket drivers for running red lights in the city. "The ruling says that the entire program is illegal," said attorney Brett Luskin of The Ticket Cricket, who represented the plaintiff Richard Masone. The cameras are still standing, however, the city of Aventura can appeal the ruling. If that happens, the cameras would continue to operate during the appeals process. Luskin said he would tell his clients not to pay tickets going forward, since Bagley's ruling undermines the ability of Aventura police to enforce red light violations. The red-light camera system allows cities to photograph the license plates of red light runners. The following South Florida cities have already installed the cameras at busy intersections: North Miami Beach, Aventura, Fort Lauderdale, Pembroke Pines, Homestead and Hollywood. Cameras operate 24-hours a day, and warning signs alert drivers where they are posted. Aventura installed its cameras in July 2008 and began fining drivers who ran red lights in October 2008. The city charged drivers $125 for the first time they got caught, but bumped the fines up to $250 for a second offense within a 12 month period, and $500 for a third offense within a 12 month period. At the time, Aventura Police Sergeant Jeff Burns said, "Our goal is to stop red-light violators and prevent the collisions and injuries that result from running a red-light. Officers have witnessed several near crashes while reviewing violations." But, many opponents to the cameras saw them as a money-making measure for the city. Aventura collected more than a million dollars in fines in the first 10 months after they started ticketing drivers. After receiving a ticket, Hallandale Beach resident Masone sued Aventura. Lawsuits opposing the cameras also sprung up in Pembroke Pines and Miami Gardens. Those who sued argued that traffic laws across the state should be uniform and that the cameras violate that principle, according to CBS4 news partner The Miami Herald. They were also upset that running red lights was considered a code violation when it is similar to a traffic ticket. Luskin argued that only the state Legislature could pass traffic laws aside from parking regulations. He also said that police officers need to actually be at an intersection to legally give out tickets for running red lights. Bagley agreed with Luskin, and if the ruling stands, it could be used to strike down red-light cameras in other communities as well. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #10 another reason I don't run red lights and have an Escort Passport radar detector in my truck for highway travel. Love it! 80 mph on 395 in Ridgecrest/Kramer's Junction is cruising speed and lower than 50% of traffic. Saved me at least 5 tickets |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-02-23 20:48 |
| #9 In Arizona they have installed both the red light cameras and hundreds of freeway cameras. Yes, hundreds of them. Here's the catch. The tickets do not count points against your record. Second, if the car is regestered to the wife and the husband gets the flashing, the wife sends in a copy of her Drivers liscense and the ticket is voided. She is not required to turn in her husband. So the husbands car should be regestered to the wive and visa versa. System beat. With that said the cameras on US 60 has slowed down traffic to a near safe level. It is doing a good job of slowing down the 90 mph drivers. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2010-02-23 20:37 |
| #8 There was a case in Germany when I was stationed there where a German citizen had his car stolen. He reported it to the police immediately. Two week later, he got a "photo-ticket" for his car running a red light in Stuttgart ten days after it was stolen. The citizen lived in Wiesbaden, about 150 miles NORTH of Stuttgart. This was during the Baader/Meinhof scare. USEUCOM - US Headquarters, Europe, is in Stuttgart. I don't remember how it ended up. The local "leadership" has been talking recently about installing red light cameras in Colorado Springs. We DO have a problem with people running red lights, but I'm not sure these cameras are the cure. Most of the problems are either caused by old folks driving like it was still 1964, or young kids stationed at one of the many military bases around the city. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2010-02-23 15:22 |
| #7 In Minnesota, red light cameras are already illegal. A defendant already pointed out that they couldn't prove that she was driving the car. (In this case her boyfriend was). Until they find a way to determine who was driving, red light cameras should not be used. Al |
| Posted by: Frozen Al 2010-02-23 11:53 |
| #6 They work quite well in Germany, well almost: Germany no longer sends the photos in the mail in an attempt to curb high divorce rates in Germany. Evidently there were quite a few cases where the photo was sent to the address of the speeder, but a wife or husband saw the photo with another member of the opposite sex in the car. Oops. DonÂ’t get caught cheating!!! link |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-02-23 11:43 |
| #5 "The ruling says that the entire program is illegal," said attorney Brett Luskin of The Ticket Cricket. That sounds like a bit of an embellishment Mr. Cricket. It’s more likely the judge has objections regarding either enforcement or penalty. Similar litigation has been overturned or has been dismissed outright. CCTV surveillance installed and implemented correctly has proven not to violate civil rights or place an undue burden on the citizenry. Also, when people are aware of such measures it is a proven deterrence. If there is proper signage and people choose to continue to break the law it is simply an example of brazen behavior. As far as the tickets – don’t do the crime if you can’t pay the fine. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2010-02-23 11:27 |
| #4 If you play word association, why does EMP come up when you think of red-light cameras? |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2010-02-23 10:59 |
| #3 If it's all about safety then turn the money over to the state general revenue fund ... |
| Posted by: Steve White 2010-02-23 07:45 |
| #2 Red light cameras are all about revenue. If they were pulling this sort of "fine the citizenry for extra cash" bullshit in China, we'd all join in in condemning a corrupt government for screwing its citizens. |
| Posted by: gromky 2010-02-23 05:24 |
| #1 If you visit the Seattle Area - do *NOT* visit or shop in Lynnwood Wa. and do *NOT* shop at Alderwood mall. Why? Lynnwood went big-time on these camera's State laws says a yellow light can be from 3-6 seconds long - in Lynnwood they are about 3.4 - barely legal. Lynnwood will ticket you for _anything_. Fail to stop *behind* the stop line on a right turn on red? $124 bucks please. Red light camera's don't make it safer - this article *PROVES IT*: "Our goal is to stop red-light violators and prevent the collisions and injuries that result from running a red-light. Officers have witnessed several near crashes while reviewing violations." That sounds like damning evidence that the camera's are *not* working or are actually *causing* more 'near crashes'. Its been proven that you can reduce accidents by simply extending the yellow light longer in intersections with a number of red-light-violations - not shorter. But then there's no revenue to be had in that is there? Much rather more more people at risk for a few bucks. There was also a parking lot next to a bus park-and-ride. People during rush hour would cut through it (the business was not busy at the time) for *years* - until Lynnwood figured out it can make money citing people $125 a pop for doing it. Then all of a sudden one day they had a dozen motorcycle cops there writing tickets by the score - no warnings no nothing. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2010-02-23 00:58 |