Stop this idea before it starts.
Aug 13th, 2008 by David Anderson
According to the Chicago Sun Times, America’s most unpopular governor (Rasmussen Reports), “Gov. Blagojevich envisions putting speed cameras on interstates across Illinois — and using the revenue to form an “elite tactical team” that would operate in Chicago and other cities”.
Arizona will be putting speed cameras in place starting in September.
Before someone gets the idea to bring these to Delaware, let’s just say no. It doesn’t tell who the driver of the vehicle is. It isn’t about justice just revenue. I hope we all remember the Laser shields that deflect the beam and have been proven to deflect speed detection to other vehicles. This is not a science, and should not be treated as such.
The idea is already here, though in very early form. See Section 111 of this year’s Bond Bill, H.B. 525.
/f
It seems to me that it wouldn’t take much to make a cover for a license plate that polarizes the light in such a way that the numbers can only be read directly from behind. Kind of like the old plastic privacy screens workers used to put on their CRTs.
Scott I may be wrong on how these would work but I believe they take the photo from the front. If so Delaware would need to go to a two plate system like Maryland. Also you are correct about things you can do to block the photo, this all came up when the red light cameras came to the state. Some of the plastic lenses are illegal, at least at the time of inspection.
They already have speed cameras here in Delaware and the photos are taken from the back. You can purchase a license plate cover online that will send a glare back to the camera when it flashes so that they can’t see your license plate numbers.
Isn’t this the idea Protack has for Delaware. These are people who do not believe in our being free! Look at London those poor people are under surveilance at all times, walking the dog, pickin your nose.
Is our Consitution dead, or do we just hav a lot of morons who dont believe in our Consitution and are bent on turning this country into an ultra police state. This is just another way to legally pick our pockets. Another form of taxation without representation.
You people oppose this because you wish to speed. Am I correct?
The 5-7 mph leeway over the speed limit that we have is sufficient, in my view. This leeway should be kept with the cameras.
We already have cameras operating at toll booths, and at traffic lights in many jurisdictions.
The invasion of privacy is minimal, in my view.
Regarding the plate shields, they should be made illegal and subject to sizable fines.
I see these highway cameras not only as speed moderators, good for highway safety, but also as fuel savers.
They also serve as a homeland security tool, just like national ID cards. Let’s be sensible here, folks.
And don’t forget to check your tire inflation — a good measure for highway safety as well as saving fuel (3-4% nationwide) and therefore lowering the gasoline price by decreasing demand.
Regarding the plate shields, they should be made illegal and subject to sizable fines.
I thought they were deemed illegal already (not a primary offense, tho). This came up with the advent of red-light cameras.
They already have speed cameras here in Delaware and the photos are taken from the back.
They do? Where? If they do, this is the absolute first I heard of it, and I would think it would have to be presented and passed through Legislature to happen. Are you sure you’re not thinking of the red-light cameras?
They also serve as a homeland security tool, just like national ID cards. Let’s be sensible here, folks.
Perry, Perry, Perry. Dude, do you have ANY concern about this slipping into a police-state?
rsmitty, yes, I do have some concern.
However, the Brits have quite successfully and effectively used surveillance cameras for homeland security. I don’t think a police state exists there.
The way to avoid slipping into a police-state is for us to become a better informed electorate, throwing off the partisan blinders and selecting the best people. If we don’t do that soon, then we deserve what we get.
Jesus, Perry Hood Is there any invasive big government revenue grabbing scheme you would ever think is too much? You’re not a liberal you;re a damn fascist. Your laundry list of reasons and ways to control people’s lives because it’s all fine with you makes me sick to my stomach. Move to China you commie bastard.
§ 2126. Display of number plates; penalty.
(c) No number plate, or any portion thereof, shall be covered with any tinted material, nor shall any other material be placed on or around a number plate which would conceal and/or obscure any information contained thereon, including the registration expiration sticker. Plate frames that do not conceal and/or obscure any information contained on the plate, including the registration expiration sticker, are not prohibited by this section.
Whoever violates subsection (c) of this section shall be fined not less than $100 nor more than $200.
(e) It shall be unlawful to sell, offer to sell, transfer, possess or use any kind of device, product, plate cover, or object, including any image altering device or spray, for the purpose of hindering, inhibiting, impeding, impairing, or preventing the photographing, recording or imaging of a license plate in connection with the enforcement of this motor vehicle code or any local or municipal traffic laws. Any person convicted of a violation of this subsection shall, for the first offense, be fined not less than $50 nor more than $1,000. For each subsequent violation occurring within 3 years of the date of the original violation, the person shall be fined not less than $200 nor more than $2,000.
I would say that, yes, they are illegal. Thanks Max!
anon just wrote: “Jesus, Perry Hood Is there any invasive big government revenue grabbing scheme you would ever think is too much? You’re not a liberal you;re a damn fascist. Your laundry list of reasons and ways to control people’s lives because it’s all fine with you makes me sick to my stomach. Move to China you commie bastard.”
Now I can see why you are “anon”!!!
Perry
Why on earth do you think the speed cameras would include any 5-7 mph leeway?
In all likelihood, our bonehead representatives would repeat their unconstitutional, money-grabbing ways that they exhibited with the installation of the red-light cameras. First, by counter intuitive legislative decree, they will say that a speed camera violation is a civil violation and, therefore, we aren’t entitled to a trial. Second, they will make the tickets absolutely impossible to fight. Your speedometer says you are going 55 mph, but the camera says 56…tough luck, that’ll be $30 citizen. Second offense?..that’ll be $50.
The only time they give you any leeway for a red-light violation is if you can prove that an emergency vehicle forced you to enter the intersection. The “judges” at the JP court coldly dismiss all other excuses, no matter how valid. (I know all this from talking with clerks that work in the JP court and trying to fight a ticket that I received in Wilmington when my car hit a patch of ice and slid into the intersection despite going only 2 mph and trying to stop…the picture they sent me showed that my car was only going 2 mph and clearly showed that it was snowing very hard; tough luck for me…that’ll be $75).
If there is money to be grabbed, the officials will abuse their power all under the guise of “public safety.” Having spent a lot of time in traffic court, not as a defendant, I can tell you that the most disgusting example of abuse arose with the push to charge as many people as possible with aggressive driving. Sure it sounds great in the News Journal to read that police are cracking down on aggressive driving, but in practice the police disgustingly abuse their power. The simplest way the officers would manufacture an aggressive driving charge is for the officer to allege that the driver was 1) speeding 2) following to closely and 3) made an improper lane change/failed to signal. Given that, at least, 95% of drivers technically speed and follow too closely, all it takes is changing lanes without using a blinker to be branded an aggressive driver.
Charged with aggressive driving, you face 12 points on your license, about a thousand dollars in fines, and a potential 10-30 days in jail!. Not to mention having to take a $150 driving course.
To boost their public image as cracking down on aggressive driving, police are encouraged to charge people with aggressive driving which leads to many baseless allegations.
I am sooooo sick of people turning their cheeks to abuses of power and civil rights in the name of “what’s best for us.” Don’t even get me started about DUI checkpoints.
I live in the city. The speed limit is 25 on almost every street.
I would not mind having a police officer posted on my street 24 hours a day. I am for the automated speed detector. But I want it set at 40 mph in a 25 mph zone.
Compromise? I believe the police officer would pay for himself, just based on fines. But they will not do it. Drivers obey the speed limit in Elsmere at 35, come into the city where the limit is 25, and go FASTER.
Even if the Officer sits and does reports while waiting for the 40 plus MPH idiot, that would be a benefit.
What happened to safety stops of Auto’s?
Broken glass, warped fenders, windshields broken, Lights out, and tinted windows.
Please add, Pennsylvania tags, insurance checks, and residency checks. If a resident for over 60 days, car must also be registered in Delaware.
Confiscate the car. Detain the driver.
It is not profiling, it is statistics.
.
Just for the record we are on camera many , many times per day that we never realize that law enforcement has access to , such as bank ATMs, security cameras in department and convience stores , DOT traffic cameras and any number of others. These are all in places that we have no expectation of privacy, and the speed cameras would fall under the same heading, so unless they want to put one in your home there is no invasion of privacy. This being said I would also prefer an actual officer setting somewhere running radar instead of the camera for the added benefit of it being a deterent to crime, instead of just a revenue generator.
Reasonable points made there Frank.
And to Paul, a 5-7 mph leeway can of course be incorporated into camera traffic control systems. Also, in addition to nabbing speed and red light violators, cameras can and are used for surveillance for security purposes and crime fighting, as Frank just pointed out; moreover, the camera’s can be used to time the traffic lights to reflect traffic density and to monitor traffic in general. We must be ready to take action if the use of cameras is ever abused by the authorities.
I am finding people who object are usually people who totally mistrust government, as Paul seems to be an example here.
A final point: There will be little to no revenue generated if most people adhere to the speed limits. Near our home in VA there was a traffic light that people routinely ran, until they installed a camera there. When the camera was tripped, there was also a bright flash of light emitted. It didn’t take long for that intersection to be rendered safe by the use of camera enforcement.
I don’t see how a polarizing filter would break § 2126. Of course that would depend on the phrase “conceal and/or obscure any information.” The information is there but you can’t see it from all angles (from the side?) as it stands now. More work for lawyers I suppose.
Perry
Don’t completely dis anons; I’ve gotten death threats for my positions (albeit not ones posted here).
I am finding people who object are usually people who totally mistrust government,
Funny you don’t strike me as the gov’t-trusting type. After all you don’t seem to trust our gov’t when it comes to Iraq, economic and foreign policy; yet you trust it with speed cameras?
This is most definitely doubleplusungood
Perry
Oh and one more thing… Do you also support the Patriot Act – the monitoring of emails and phone calls by the government? After all it makes us safer and it’s only a problem if you are doing something wrong.
I think a mistrust of any large organization is healthy. It doesn’t mean that you can’t trust it or rely upon it sometimes, just recognize that occasionally it can get out of line and therefore must be watched.
As for the UK’s camera’s they haven’t stopped crime; in fact if anything the UK has gotten more like the dystopic future shown in A Clockwork Orange if you ask me.
English permitted these small incremental steps like cameras at stop lights, then cameras peering down every street, they have no privacy and absolutely hate it. It’s too late for them, they already no they have no rights, and they have no guns, so the majority are dying from knife fights. We don’t want to go down this slippery slope.
[...] the same breath trust their candidate for president on legislation that he backs. This came up in this thread at DelawarePolitics.net concerning the possibility of speed cameras on Delaware’s [...]
I am not a speeder, and I never received a ticket in my life. That is the reason I oppose this idea Perry. On rare occasions, I let someone else drive one of my vehicles. E. G. one of my friends went with me to the airport and drove my car back home. I hate the idea of removing the responsibility from the driver to the car owner. A good deed can become a liability pretty quickly. Let everyone be responsible for her own actions.
The Great God of Safety is often used as a cover for revenue gathering and a lot of two-bit towns use their police forces as revenue sources so that they can afford a police force. This seems as circular logic.
Quite often speed limits are arbitrarily established and ignore engineering consideration. When most people exceed the posted speed limit, there is good reason to believe that the limit was set too low. The 80th percentile rule demonstrates this.
This is not to justifiy speeding through residential neighborhoods or in school zones.
We could have a lot more safety on our roads if people would practice lane discipline….no poking along in the left hand lane and creating a rolling roadblock.
Note the silence of the selective civil libertarians about Big Brother Cameras on roads.
“This is most definitely doubleplusungood” Mike Matthews wisely notes.
How many made the connection?
Big Nanny is simply Big Brother in drag.
The English reacted to internal threats first from Irish Nationalist extremists, then from Islamic extremists. We face the same threat.
Their surveillance techniques, including extensive use of cameras, paid off regarding the arrest of these terrorist perps.
Anecdotally, I have never once read in the English print media an objection to the surveillance cameras all over the place in major cities. I am a daily reader of the British press.
Surveillance of this kind requires intense oversight to protect our liberty, our rights to privacy. The problem we have had with the Bush administration is that they have basically ignored the courts and the laws; moreover, they have corrupted the Justice Department. Congressional oversight has been stymied by first having the President’s party in lock-step, then after 2006 refusing to respond to too many Congressional subpoenas.
From these experiences, I can understand how people like anon and Artdo and Scott are wary. Under Bush, I share that view. We need change in order to reverse Bush’s lawlessness.
The behavior of the DE State government does not enhance trust in government either, in fact, the contrary. We need change in order to take down the power of these good old boy tyrants that we currently have in power. (Sorry for the strong language, but I think it fits.) We put them there!!!
So change is in the hands of us voters. Are you folks going to vote for leaders who will bring us change on these issues discussed here?
We do need change in Delaware State government. In AZ, the speed cameras don’t take effect until you exceed 10 MPH. In DE, we shorten the time on some yellow lights and install cameras. Why should I trust them to keep up with adjusting the calibration and keeping it at a fair level?
And don’t forget to check your tire inflation — because if Barack Husain Obama gets elected you’ll be paying $10/gallon
Perry,
I am in support of the police. For those who are not, I have a simple question, who would you hire to take over the job of Public Safety and enforcement of Laws? I will give you my answer: “Whoever takes over is also subject to corruptive forces.” SO, I believe the only answer is citizen oversight. A review of police policies.
I said that the speed camera can be used when the limit is exceeded by 15 mph. [ I am afraid of the slippery slope.] The limit I propose is to handle the excessive speeder, and I would hope that is put into the legislation.
I do believe, that the proper enforcement of laws is done by a REAL police officer. With the violence levels in Wilmington, and the long records that many of our repeat criminals and Murderers have, I strongly believe that something is wrong. These career criminals belong locked up, not back on the streets. TOO bad, we can not hold Judges and Social Service workers responsible for the criminals that they help get released, by saying that they will “BEHAVE properly”. There should be some responsibility attached to their opinions. Otherwise, they will say that all of their “CLIENTS” deserve to be let loose on the Public Again and Again.
DA, do you have wi-fi internet connection at home? If so, do you lock it? If not you are responsible for activity going through your router whether it was you or not. Just an FYI.