MotoHouston.com MotoHouston.com
Register Members List Member Map Media Calendar Garage Forum Home Mark Forums Read

Go Back   MotoHouston.com > General Discussion > General Discussion (Moto Related)
Forgot info?

Welcome to MotoHouston.com! You are currently viewing our forums as a guest which gives you limited access to the community. By joining our free community you will have access to great discounts from our sponsors, the ability to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content, free email, classifieds, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, join our community!

Register Today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.


Like us on Facebook! Regular shirt GIVEAWAYS and more

Advertisement

Reply
Share This Thread: 
Subscribe to this Thread Thread Tools
Old 10-03-2007, 10:49 AM   #21
Moody
Holy Smokes!
 
Moody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Feedback Rating: (4)
Posts: 14,685


Bike(s):
281









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
but in this case, the witnesses are every person that sees that picture is witnessing you running the red light, photographic evidence is harder to disprove in court than a cops story of what he saw
They did not witness the event though. So, how is the state going to have a witness testify against you for doing something if there was no one there?
__________________

Open your eyes and reclaim the freedom you were born with. - Moody
Moody is offline   Reply With Quote
Similar Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Red Light Cameras Returning NgaWhat Off Topic 182 10-24-2011 02:59 PM
RED LIGHT CAMERAS GONE! morvegil General Discussion (Moto Related) 89 11-04-2010 05:06 PM
if you think red light cameras are bad... SBK Pilot General Discussion (Moto Related) 24 11-29-2007 11:48 AM
caught on red light cameras bigjay77 Off Topic 18 05-23-2007 11:02 PM
Advertisement
Old 10-03-2007, 10:55 AM   #22
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by Moody View Post
They did not witness the event though. So, how is the state going to have a witness testify against you for doing something if there was no one there?
look at the picture... it shows exactly what the witness would have seen. so if a camera videos someone robbing an atm and no other person is there to see it, then they should not be held responsible for it?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:01 AM   #23
Moody
Holy Smokes!
 
Moody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Feedback Rating: (4)
Posts: 14,685


Bike(s):
281









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
look at the picture... it shows exactly what the witness would have seen. so if a camera videos someone robbing an atm and no other person is there to see it, then they should not be held responsible for it?
Ok first I want to state my tone here. I am simply being the antagonist because this lends itself to leading to a much bigger civil liberty issue.

So, if we begin to except photographic evidence as the only means of prosecution then how do we justify it beyond reasonable doubt? We all know photographs can be forged and this should create some doubt.
__________________

Open your eyes and reclaim the freedom you were born with. - Moody
Moody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:05 AM   #24
Moody
Holy Smokes!
 
Moody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Feedback Rating: (4)
Posts: 14,685


Bike(s):
281









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
look at the picture... it shows exactly what the witness would have seen. so if a camera videos someone robbing an atm and no other person is there to see it, then they should not be held responsible for it?
Now on this topic.... the photographic evidence alone would not be substantial enough but, it would allow for a case. So now in court they would have to do more digging to discredit the alaby. This may not be difficult for them to do but has to be done under due process of the law. Which is another point we are lacking with the camera tickets.
__________________

Open your eyes and reclaim the freedom you were born with. - Moody
Moody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:06 AM   #25
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by Moody View Post
Ok first I want to state my tone here. I am simply being the antagonist because this lends itself to leading to a much bigger civil liberty issue.

So, if we begin to except photographic evidence as the only means of prosecution then how do we justify it beyond reasonable doubt? We all know photographs can be forged and this should create some doubt.
i see what you are saying, if you are caught on film doing it then you are guilty, resonable doubt has been established. if the pictures come from a reputable source then they can be taken as proof. these cameras would be taking the same pictures day in and day out. one would have to show that these cameras are not reliable to get it dismissed. these pictures may also never be in anyone's hands to allow them to be altered
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:07 AM   #26
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by Moody View Post
Now on this topic.... the photographic evidence alone would not be substantial enough but, it would allow for a case. So now in court they would have to do more digging to discredit the alaby. This may not be difficult for them to do but has to be done under due process of the law. Which is another point we are lacking with the camera tickets.
no, the video alone with the date and time stamp, would discredit his alibi
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:09 AM   #27
Moody
Holy Smokes!
 
Moody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Feedback Rating: (4)
Posts: 14,685


Bike(s):
281









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
i see what you are saying, if you are caught on film doing it then you are guilty, resonable doubt has been established. if the pictures come from a reputable source then they can be taken as proof. these cameras would be taking the same pictures day in and day out. one would have to show that these cameras are not reliable to get it dismissed. these pictures may also never be in anyone's hands to allow them to be altered
Exactly, I think you see my view. I am just trying to not wake up in Orwell's 1984 but we are getting close.
__________________

Open your eyes and reclaim the freedom you were born with. - Moody
Moody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:20 AM   #28
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by Moody View Post
Exactly, I think you see my view. I am just trying to not wake up in Orwell's 1984 but we are getting close.
i do see exactly what you are saying, but until people quit breaking laws that are killing people, it is what needs to be done. it is still on public property
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:28 AM   #29
cashtown
Lawyers Guns and Money
 
cashtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hunt, TX HWY 39
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,955

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
'05 Hayabusa '98 ZX-6E









I don't believe that cameras are the answer. I think an officer should have to personally cite you when you break a law.

That said, I ****ing hate red light runners - and drivers who roll through "right-on-reds" without stopping.

As a motorcyclist, these drivers are my enemies.

This thread over on H-I has people who complain about having to stop for right turns at red lights because "they drive through the same lights everyday, so they know when they have to stop."
Give me a break.
__________________
freak20brothers



Fat Freddy says, "Busas are for posing!"
cashtown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:38 AM   #30
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by cashtown View Post
I don't believe that cameras are the answer. I think an officer should have to personally cite you when you break a law.

That said, I ****ing hate red light runners - and drivers who roll through "right-on-reds" without stopping.

As a motorcyclist, these drivers are my enemies.

This thread over on H-I has people who complain about having to stop for right turns at red lights because "they drive through the same lights everyday, so they know when they have to stop."
Give me a break.
so instead of the cameras, lets put an officer there that can chase down every person that runs the light, he'll know they ran it becuse he can see exactly when their light turned red. he can give them the ticket right then, but pause as nesseccary to chase down the car beside them that also ran it to give them a ticket. and lets give him a camera, that he can turn on then take a picture with as the car is running the red light.

how practical is that just so you can "face your accusor"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 11:53 AM   #31
hypertrophyy
Senior Member
 
hypertrophyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodlands
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 706


Bike(s):
07 600rr track









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
so instead of the cameras, lets put an officer there that can chase down every person that runs the light, he'll know they ran it becuse he can see exactly when their light turned red. he can give them the ticket right then, but pause as nesseccary to chase down the car beside them that also ran it to give them a ticket. and lets give him a camera, that he can turn on then take a picture with as the car is running the red light.

how practical is that just so you can "face your accusor"
i see your point......

90 years ago thats about how its was. Just cause we have the technology today doesn't mean we have the right to abuse it.

I'm not bias or agaisnt the rule. I dide get a $75 dollor ticket in the mail about a month ago when I was going threw a yellow light and I misjudged the light by a millisecond and caught the red. Recieved a nice pic of my ride....looking like it was at full stop at a red light and then another pic of me just taking off through it. Looking at this made me laugh cause I remember when it happened and how close I was. Also, the pics made me look so much more evil.

Well, I learned my lesson..... in that intersection........

Last edited by hypertrophyy; 10-03-2007 at 11:56 AM.
hypertrophyy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 01:36 PM   #32
cashtown
Lawyers Guns and Money
 
cashtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hunt, TX HWY 39
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,955

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
'05 Hayabusa '98 ZX-6E









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
so instead of the cameras, lets put an officer there that can chase down every person that runs the light, he'll know they ran it becuse he can see exactly when their light turned red. he can give them the ticket right then, but pause as nesseccary to chase down the car beside them that also ran it to give them a ticket. and lets give him a camera, that he can turn on then take a picture with as the car is running the red light.

how practical is that just so you can "face your accusor"

Don't get me wrong.

I hate drivers who run red lights, and I actually think that the cameras are an effective deterent. F 'em. Let 'em get tickets.

However, I don't like the idea of cameras "patrolling" us. Next thing you know, we've got a speed camera every mile on the interstate. That could put an end to driving 5 miles over the limit on a roadtrip real fast - not to mention all other kinds of speeding.


Who's to say where it stops.
__________________
freak20brothers



Fat Freddy says, "Busas are for posing!"
cashtown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 01:41 PM   #33
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by cashtown View Post
Don't get me wrong.

I hate drivers who run red lights, and I actually think that the cameras are an effective deterent. F 'em. Let 'em get tickets.

However, I don't like the idea of cameras "patrolling" us. Next thing you know, we've got a speed camera every mile on the interstate. That could put an end to driving 5 miles over the limit on a roadtrip real fast - not to mention all other kinds of speeding.


Who's to say where it stops.
true, and i'd hate to see that too, but in theory, you shouldn't be doing 5 mph over anyway... it is the speed LIMIT. that would really suck but when you think about it, if the speed limit was 75 you'd do 80, if it was 80 ou'd do 85.... what is to stop people from trying to push the limit a little more?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 02:09 PM   #34
cashtown
Lawyers Guns and Money
 
cashtown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hunt, TX HWY 39
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 7,955

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
'05 Hayabusa '98 ZX-6E









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
true, and i'd hate to see that too, but in theory, you shouldn't be doing 5 mph over anyway... it is the speed LIMIT. that would really suck but when you think about it, if the speed limit was 75 you'd do 80, if it was 80 ou'd do 85.... what is to stop people from trying to push the limit a little more?


I look at speed limit signs like multiplication tables, or maybe like a personal challenge.

If you don't like speeders then you wouldn't like me.

I try to be responsible though....
__________________
freak20brothers



Fat Freddy says, "Busas are for posing!"
cashtown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 03:38 PM   #35
Pat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 106


Bike(s):
2006 FZ6









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
but in this case, the witnesses are every person that sees that picture is witnessing you running the red light, photographic evidence is harder to disprove in court than a cops story of what he saw
I think you are missing part of the point:
The registered owner has four options to resolve the Notice of Violation.
1. Pay the $75 fine either by mail, phone using a credit card, or in person.
2. Pay online at www.ViolationInfo.com.
3. Appeal the violation in Municipal Court through an Adjudication Hearing Officer.
4. Submit a "Declaration of Non-Liability" through the Court for its review stating that the vehicle's registered owner was not driving the car at the time the violation was recorded.

The camera witnesses the vehicle going through the intersection, not the person.

That is one reason we have a right to face our accusers. We face no such accuser. Has anyone else ever driven any of your vehicles? You now get the fine for their traffic mistakes!

These devices mean that we are no longer innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of our peers (lack of due process).

In said court, evidence of the photograph could then be used against you. As is proper due process.

Add to that that our fifth amendment rights are being kicked a little. These cameras are kind of the ultimate form of self-incrimination (without a Miranda even being issued). They try to compensate that issue by placing signs stating that the intersections have cameras. The camera warning signs should state something like, "Any action can and may be used against you in a court of law."

As I stated above, these cameras are needed due to the masses. I still think they are in violation of our bill of rights, though. The redemption is that the masses will not argue the charge and will pay their fine.
Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 03:45 PM   #36
sbfuller
the crotch-rocketeer!
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dickinson
Feedback Rating: (1)
Posts: 15,916

Experience: 10+ years

Bike(s):
2006 Hayabusa (totaled)2007 Hayabusa, 2004 CRF 50









Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat View Post
I think you are missing part of the point:
The registered owner has four options to resolve the Notice of Violation.
1. Pay the $75 fine either by mail, phone using a credit card, or in person.
2. Pay online at www.ViolationInfo.com.
3. Appeal the violation in Municipal Court through an Adjudication Hearing Officer.
4. Submit a "Declaration of Non-Liability" through the Court for its review stating that the vehicle's registered owner was not driving the car at the time the violation was recorded.

The camera witnesses the vehicle going through the intersection, not the person.

That is one reason we have a right to face our accusers. We face no such accuser. Has anyone else ever driven any of your vehicles? You now get the fine for their traffic mistakes!yes, see your staement #4 above... it covers that part of the "what if"

These devices mean that we are no longer innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of our peers (lack of due process).

In said court, evidence of the photograph could then be used against you. As is proper due process.

Add to that that our fifth amendment rights are being kicked a little. These cameras are kind of the ultimate form of self-incrimination (without a Miranda even being issued). They try to compensate that issue by placing signs stating that the intersections have cameras. The camera warning signs should state something like, "Any action can and may be used against you in a court of law."

As I stated above, these cameras are needed due to the masses. I still think they are in violation of our bill of rights, though. The redemption is that the masses will not argue the charge and will pay their fine.

and according to you, the VEHICLE should be able to face the accusor
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by less_than_coop View Post
Its the stupidity. It gets added to our forum in normal and controlled doses which actually serves to the benefit of the website.
sbfuller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 05:53 PM   #37
Pat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Houston
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 106


Bike(s):
2006 FZ6









Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
and according to you, the VEHICLE should be able to face the accusor
According to the Bill of Rights, we have the right to face our accusors. In this case, though, we are being accused of something our vehicle did. I like the Bill of Rights, it has my right of Free Speach.

That vehicle could have been stolen, driven by a mechanic that's testing a fix, driven by a friend or family member -- not us, the owner. Given that some cars can now parallel park themselves, it eventually could be my vehicle!

Oh, and "Per the City of Houstonís ordinance you may nominate a driver or new owner one time only." I could not get a blank declaration of non-liability downloaded at this time. However, that indicates that you only get to use that once.

Thus, while the vehicle is being driven around a corner a few times by a mechanic -- I would have to pay the fines after the first one!

They by-pass the Bill of Rights by labelling this a civil penalty/infraction:
"Failure to pay the civil penalty or to contest liability prior to the 45th day after receipt of the notice is an admission of liability, and failure to appear at an administrative adjudication hearing after having requested a hearing is an admission of liability and constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal. Failure to pay the civil penalty within 45 days after receipt of this Notice of Violation shall result in the imposition of a late-payment fee of $25. If the second notice remains unpaid, collections proceedings and entry of judgment against you may proceed."

Interesting, though, that they reward a monetary amount without granting a right to a jury trial. That is actually a violation of rights from the Constitution As we are supposed to be granted the option of a trial by jury for any amounts over $20. Yes, they have may a photo as evidence; but, it is still our right to have a trial by jury (even if we know we are going to lose). We might get the jury to dismiss the extra charges the mechanic made since he was the one that drove around the corner! However, there are no jury trials for these violations, just an "Adjudication Hearing Officer". We don't even get a judge!

There are lots of Constitutional rights that are either violated and/or the spirit of those rights are abused with these cameras.

Sadly, no one will question the Constitutional rights violations and how these set a scary precedent.

Even I don't care. I should; but, I will never be caught by one of those. I just don't care if other people are having their rights violated because they are driving dangerously.
Pat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 06:01 PM   #38
CBRGuy954
don't talk about it
 
CBRGuy954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Katy
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 58


Bike(s):
2003 CBR 954rr









I think it will be alot safer for us. I mean people in cars don't see us as it is.....maybe it will help.
CBRGuy954 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 06:14 PM   #39
dirtyrice411
Staying Stoned
 
dirtyrice411's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Pearland, TX
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 530


Bike(s):
03 R1 Limited Edition.









Send a message via AIM to dirtyrice411
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbfuller View Post
^^^^that last part has to be one of the dumbest things i have heard recently. the bike rider is stronger than some becuase he didn't get hit by a car that ran a red light?!?! but you are saying if that car, which had a dumb driver, took out our friend on the bike, then he did the world a favor by removing someone that is stronger than some but dumb for not expecting the car to run a red light?
Yes those that are smater, will live longer, they are mentally stronger than the next and because they can anticipate an action they resolved a solution that saved them. there for by the survival of the fittest, they did their part and are still alive. Its like a kid that eats lead paint chips and get sick and dies. I don't like the idea of a kid dying, but if your that dumb then you kinda deserve it.

we all know there are plenty of morons to go around, and If a car took out a rider, while running a red light(didn't stop while turning right) then the rider should have been anticipating something and chose a better lane position, speed, or manuver. Now that dumb red light runner, on the other hand will either learn from this or continue being dumb in which case they will run a red light one time and someone will take them out. survival of the fittest is that only the strong survive. weither that be physical, mental, or whatever, if you watch whats going on you should be able to avoid 99.9 percent of problems.

we should prosecute the redlight runners, but like it states earlier "due process" and "resonable doubt" they have to prove that I was driving and commiting the crime, not my car. yes the cameras don't lie and yes, they are untampered and viable witnesses, but they don't capture me commiting the crime, it captures my vehicle. that doesn't mean I did it, that means my car was doing it(could be a car theif) either way we are guilty until proven innocent on this case and it does violate our civil libertys.

now here is a brain buster for you, even if they were to make the camera's capture the person commiting the crime, what about motorcyclist that wear full faced helmets with tinted screens? you can't capture a possative ID on one of them can you?
dirtyrice411 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 06:35 PM   #40
GsxrStar
drama patrol
 
GsxrStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: north shore rida
Feedback Rating: (0)
Posts: 3,205


Bike(s):
05 gsxr 750









Send a message via AIM to GsxrStar
imma snip all the cameras lol cs style
__________________
http://www.motohouston.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26445
GsxrStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Advertisement


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 AM.


MotoHouston.com is not responsible for the content posted by users.
Privacy Policy