quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp you do realize the burden of proof is on the crown. without photographic evidence or police eye witness testimony every case would be thrown out of court if they attempted to stick it to the registered primary driver.

So what's wrong with tzxing the car for the same violation?

Sure, as the owner you'd be pissed to get a bill in the mail from a red light or speed camera violation when you weren't driving. but wouldn't you know who had your car on that day and time? In Ontario, photo radar never cost you points on your license or insurance - it was simply a fine precisely because they couldn't prove who was in the car at the time.

Therefore, if you got this ticket in the mail, go after your buddy who borrowed your car that day for the fine. It's really quite easy.

___________________
Paul

At the end of the day it was all about money, not safety.

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse This points to every rumour / stereotype about cops always laying more fines at the end of the month to get quotas and such. They've already spent the money to buy and install the cameras too! Why just let them sit there?

I'd say based on this article, that stereotype has now been proven.

quote:

Fuck, the roads are safer! You're saving money in hospital costs and lives! What more could you want? Oh yeah - money.

That's exactly how I feel. Such a shame really.

quote:

Originally posted by pmoisse So what's wrong with tzxing the car for the same violation? Sure, as the owner you'd be pissed to get a bill in the mail from a red light or speed camera violation when you weren't driving. but wouldn't you know who had your car on that day and time? In Ontario, photo radar never cost you points on your license or insurance - it was simply a fine precisely because they couldn't prove who was in the car at the time. Therefore, if you got this ticket in the mail, go after your buddy who borrowed your car that day for the fine. It's really quite easy.

the whole point is, a 100 to 200 dollar fine isnt enough to change driver habits. its not that much money. unless you start sticking it to a driver no one will give a shit. hence it just becomes a stupid cash grab by the city. This really pisses me off in ottawa since we elected lex luthor for mayor on a platform of 0% tax increases. Since he got elected, the dumbass has increased property taxes on average of 4.7% and now after our near record winter snowfall (over 4 meters this season) he wants to charge a further levy of 50 $ per household to cover teh costs of the winter maintenance (money he should have had in teh budget still had he not filandered the maintenance surplus of the last 5 years on bailing hte city out of the LRT project). o yea i almost forgot he is charged by the OPP with electoral fraud for rigging the municipal election. for everyones information it was lex luthor that brought in teh red light cameras.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I have 3 hobbies: gaming, DJing & correcting maladjusted fools on the internet.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Yeah, I’d like to know what horrible, scarring incident in your childhood turned you into such an ignorant, intellectual-hating philistine?

^ Wow, that's a creepy mayor for sure.

Still though, if the Dallas article is any example, the cameras and associated tax does seem to have an impact on driver behaviour - at least at intersections where everyone knows there's a camera.

But hey, if you know there's a camera and you run the light anyways, you should pay the dumbass tax since you should know better. Or just drive more responsibly and give half the fine to me if you feel so strongly about pissing money away on avoidable fines.

In the 16 years I've been driving, I've done some pretty nutty things (Buffalo to Waterloo in a little under an hour for instance). Even still, I can't argue that fines like speeding and red light cameras are entirely avoidable if you're just being smart about it.

___________________
Paul

But seriously, is anyone really surprised by this? What I would like to see is a serious backlash from the tax payers for wasting their money on a project that they got rid of because it actually did what they said they intended it to do.

And if the police department wants more funding, perhaps they should try to get more allocated from the state, which might mean cutting back on irrelevant spending in other areas.