Cameras for Parking Violations? (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

I guess it was next after red lights and speeding. Things are getting very Big Brother. And this is actually the first I've ever heard that you are not supposed to feed the meter when time runs out.
=================================================================

Ferreting Out Meter Feeders
D.C.'s Parking Enforcers Are Testing High-Tech Gizmos To Identify Scofflaws and Free Up Spaces for Shoppers


By Michael E. Ruane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 19, 2008; Page B01

Beware, all you parking meter feeders and restricted zone overtimers.

Take heed, you who are weighed down with quarters or hoping the parking enforcement officer is working a distant neighborhood.

The swift and unblinking eye of the mobile parking camera might be coming your way.

The District's Department of Public Works is evaluating several systems that would enable parking officers to swing quickly through a neighborhood with a license plate reader or similar technology to catch violators

 

[rob021275]

It's usually a safe bet that anyone driving a vehicle that has a "How am I driving?" sticker put on crooked like that will not be a good driver.

I think it's amazing that there are actually questions of Civil Rights over cameras in high crime areas to catch criminals "in the act", but somehow, this is OK. If there can be issues with the "Red Light Cameras" and who was driving the car, how are they going to know who is responsible for illegally parking when NO ONE is in the car?

 

[porculator]

how are they going to know who is responsible for illegally parking when NO ONE is in the car?

Seems to me thats the case with ANY parking ticket. In theory I see nothing wrong with this. But as a commuter who illegally parks about twice a week in DC and gets away with it every time, I don't like it (but I guess thats the point)

 

[antipop]

how are they going to know who is responsible for illegally parking when NO ONE is in the car?

it's the same with the red light cameras......the camera doesn't take a picture of the driver....more proof that it's all about money

 

[CT Saints Fan]

it's the same with the red light cameras......the camera doesn't take a picture of the driver....more proof that it's all about money

Yes. That's why a "citation" from a red light camera is not treated as a moving violation - because it's the car identified, not the driver. $$$, not safety.

 

[antipop]

Yes. That's why a "citation" from a red light camera is not treated as a moving violation - because it's the car identified, not the driver. $$$, not safety.

so, you could borrow my car, run a red light, park in a handicap space, and i get the tickets.....

that makes sense

 

[porculator]

so, you could borrow my car, run a red light, park in a handicap space, and i get the tickets.....

that makes sense

How is that any different than getting a normal parking ticket? There's no way for them to determine who parked the car under any circumstance.

 

[antipop]

How is that any different than getting a normal parking ticket? There's no way for them to determine who parked the car under any circumstance.

you are right about that....but as far as the moving violation, it's just wrong to ticket the owner for the driver's actions.....if they are not the same person

 

[Hoyasaint]

you are right about that....but as far as the moving violation, it's just wrong to ticket the owner for the driver's actions.....if they are not the same person

Yeah but they look at it like this either you drove your car or you gave your permission for someone to drive your car (unless of course if it was stolen). Therefore you are part of the problem. Lesson: don't lend your car to people who run lights.

 

[antipop]

Yeah but they look at it like this either you drove your car or you gave your permission for someone to drive your car (unless of course if it was stolen). Therefore you are part of the problem. Lesson: don't lend your car to people who run lights.

well, that's ludicrous....especially since the cameras are set to catch even the slightest running of a red light.....there are no laws against having someone else drive my car...

and what about a parent who let's their kid drive.....

moving violations should go to the driver

 

[CT Saints Fan]

you are right about that....but as far as the moving violation, it's just wrong to ticket the owner for the driver's actions.....if they are not the same person

That's why "citations" issued by red light cameras are not moving violations. I don't even think they are traffic tickets in any way. I think they fall under some sort of civil fine/penalty.

 

[antipop]

That's why "citations" issued by red light cameras are not moving violations. I don't even think they are traffic tickets in any way. I think they fall under some sort of civil fine/penalty.

so, they can't affect your insurance in any way???

 

[Hoyasaint]

well, that's ludicrous....especially since the cameras are set to catch even the slightest running of a red light.....there are no laws against having someone else drive my car...

and what about a parent who let's their kid drive.....

No there is no law against letting someone else drive your car, but you bear the responsiblity of that decision. If someone else drives your car and smashes into another car don't think you won't get sued because you weren't driving. Its your car and your responsibility, that is how the law looks at it.

Edit: No these automatic tickets do not affect your insurance, they are pretty much like parking tickets

 

[antipop]

If someone else drives your car and smashes into another car don't think you won't get sued because you weren't driving. Its your car and your responsibility, that is how the law looks at it.

i realize that.....it doesn't make it any less silly

 

[Jonesy77]

i realize that.....it doesn't make it any less silly

You think that's a crazy law? You can actually spill coffee on yourself and sue the brewer.