Video Ticket - Big Brother

[billhammond]

cornflake said:

We need an electronic karma system for drivers. Get smited enough by others who have to share the road with you and your car ceases to operate.

Sure, as long as "ceases to operate" means
BLOWED UP REAL GOOD!!!

[Deleted]

The main problem that I see with the cameras is that it doesn't work at all to smile sweetly at a camera and coyly say "Oops, you caught me." ;D

[Deleted]

I'm with Bill on this one.

There's a place downtown that has "No Right Turn on Red" signs all over this one intersection. Do people read the sign? No. It drives me nuts. They ought to put a video camera there, they'd make a fortune on tickets.

[loopysanchez]

trunk thumpers and loud Harleys.... what "hood" do you guys live in.

I live in a decent neighborhood, a fairly long way from "tha' hood". But it seems the trendy thing among certain white suburban youth, and certain rednecks of almost any age, is to try to incorporate so-called "black culture" into their lifestyle in order to appear cool, hip, or to simply get more attention. And the easiest way to do that without actually having to make an effort to understand anything about another race is to simply engage in the most obvious, stereotypical behavior they can--Buy a loud-ass car stereo and play earth-shaking rap music at 120 db's when they drive down the block.

[sidheguitarmichael]

cornflake said:

We need an electronic karma system for drivers. Get smited enough by others who have to share the road with you and your car ceases to operate.

We have that in spokane. It's called "bullet holes"...



---

So long as we are going with cameras that remotely record and ticket "dangerous illegal behavior", let's throw in a vote for urinals that scan for THC or Opiates and match that against a DNA database (or the RFI info chip in your passport that we all need to own to vacation in Canada or Mexico this coming january, in your coat pocket, in front of the urinal...). This would match illicit pee with people that then get a visit from officer friendly at a date sometime down the road. That'll cut down on illegal/anti social behavior, the drug trade, property crime that goes with it, all that stuff.

Of course, the argument could be made that someone else could have stolen your pee or 'pport... maybe the solution then is to make it a "fine only" situation... no jail time... to get around whatever is left of the constitution when we install our new "American Standards"...
;D

[knobtwister]

Karma system for drivers would be great except then people would courteous to a fault just to build up karma points.

In a lot of cases courtesy is annoying or even dangerous.

Don

[billhammond]

I think I have become an even safer driver since I got my new car, for two reasons:

1. I am even more paranoid about getting so much as a scratch on that shiny lump of steel. So I am driving VERY defensively.

2. I now have this heretofore unknown tool to add to my control options -- POWER. It helps me get away from people and slink along in my own quiet space. It's especially handy when some land barge like a 4x4 pickup or SUV is crowding me on a freeway, because you know what? They are not fast or nimble in the least!

[patrick]

"

So long as we are going with cameras that remotely record and ticket "dangerous illegal behavior", let's throw in a vote for urinals that scan for THC or Opiates and match that against a DNA database (or the RFI info chip in your passport that we all need to own to vacation in Canada or Mexico this coming january, in your coat pocket, in front of the urinal...). This would match illicit pee with people that then get a visit from officer friendly at a date sometime down the road. That'll cut down on illegal/anti social behavior, the drug trade, property crime that goes with it, all that stuff.

Of course, the argument could be made that someone else could have stolen your pee or 'pport... maybe the solution then is to make it a "fine only" situation... no jail time... to get around whatever is left of the constitution when we install our new "American Standards"...
;D"

So, they're going to have cameras in the urinals to identify who peed THC? And cameras in the toilets for the same reason? That's going to make for some interesting evidence to introduce into court. ;D

[Doug]

Doug overstates the "presumption of innocense" thing. No one is required to presume that the cop (or any witness) is lying. No one is required to presume that evidence is faked. In fact, it is the opposite: Jurors are usually instructed to judge the credibility of witnesses/evidence in its entirety, without presuming perjury or manufactured evidence.

How can you presume someone is innocent if you don't presume that those trying to convict him are lying. Can't be done.

[Deleted]

I'll vote for the cameras. Hey Bill.... could I borrow your license plates?

[Marshall]

(I've been off line for a while)

mccoyblues said:

Another issue is who was driving the vehicle. The vehicle may be registered to me, but what if a co-worker or my brother was driving the van. Why should I be ticketed. Where is the proof of who was driving.

Interesting you should pick up on that McCoy. Because in the case I sited, a guy borrowed his daughter's van to run some errands. It's his daughter that got the ticket in the mail.

Now the guy griped but said he'd pay the fine. But whose record does it go on ?

[timfarney]

Give it up, Bill. You're never going to get Doug to believe that anything the government does is good, even if it keeps people from running red lights and executing illegal turns without sitting cops at intersections when they should be looking for crooks. I'm with you on this one. I wish there were more of those cameras. But I wish they were paid for by flat fees instead of by the fines. Putting a profit motive in it invites abuse, and I'll bet they're grossly overpaid for in that system as well.

Tim

[loopysanchez]

Simple logic flow chart is as follows: You and the rest of the public elect the people who collect the money from everybody to build the roads that everybody drives on, and make/enforce the rules one must abide by to operate their car on those roads.

So, using that utterly simple (yet completely valid) logic, there are two simple solutions that will allow you to drive on roads that don't have cameras assisting in the enforcement of their rules:

1. Vote for people who will remove the cameras, and get 51% of the other people to vote for 'em, too.

2. Buy up long, narrow stretches of land between your house and everywhere you travel to, and build your own private roads.

Sucks, but that's life.

[Doug]

You forgot # 3 Loopy
#3 make them to expensive to run

[lakeside]

Now, don't go shouting at me for this, but doesn't it seem strange that not too long ago everyone was up in arms about so-called illegal "wiretaps". So-called because reasonable people on both sides of the aisle argued about if they really WERE wiretaps and if they really WERE illegal. The papers were full of reports and the forums full of arguments. My PRIVACY is being invaded I read over and over. They are PROTECTING us, they are PROTECTING us, I read on the other side. There was alot of energy and enthusiasm, on both sides, about the subject of government watching its citizens.

Contrast that to this - the government puts a camera on a street corner to monitor the populace and EVERYONE shrugs. There is no DOUBT what they are doing, no DOUBT that it is a camera monitoring what you, a free citizen are doing. Watching and waiting, to catch you doing something wrong. The response? I wish we had MORE of 'em!

Hoo boy, we really are lambs going to the slaughter aren't we. Strange.

Btw, my position on camera's: I'm ok with it, IF it is for short term use. I'm against a permanent camera installation on street corners, watching the populace, just in case they do something wrong. It just doesn't sit well with me. Use it as a law enforcement tool. But, permanent camera's on the street corners? No thanks.