photo traffic ticket
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
-
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 3515
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:26 pm
- Location: n.e. ohio
- Contact:
photo traffic ticket
I' am the person the car is registered to and it was another family member using the car that day. That city would like me to send them 200.00 bucks for the speeding infraction Not sure I agree with this type of inforcement. I have to send the money to a p.o box in Arizona in two weeks.
Black Rifles Matter
- JediSkipdogg
- Posts: 10257
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
- Location: Batavia
- Contact:
Re: photo traffic ticket
Didn't they deem that illegal years ago? Big case down here that banned all red light and speed cameras unless an officer was actively watching and issuing the citation.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers
Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
-
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 3515
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:26 pm
- Location: n.e. ohio
- Contact:
Re: photo traffic ticket
I think it said the camera was monitored by an officer. You would think at 200 a pop they could afford to pay for a real stop and issue a real ticket.JediSkipdogg wrote:Didn't they deem that illegal years ago? Big case down here that banned all red light and speed cameras unless an officer was actively watching and issuing the citation.
Black Rifles Matter
- sodbuster95
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 6954
- Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:14 pm
- Location: Maumee
- Contact:
Re: photo traffic ticket
//rant on...JediSkipdogg wrote:Didn't they deem that illegal years ago? Big case down here that banned all red light and speed cameras unless an officer was actively watching and issuing the citation.
There are a few jurisdictions that have decided the court decision left a loophole and they are deploying "mobile speed cameras". Basically, an officer equipped with a camera radar gun. Utterly and totally bogus, if you ask me (yes, I may have gotten some of these tickets). I take such severe exception with this method as it has no basis whatsoever in traffic enforcement or safety. In Toledo, the "officer" is usually on a motorcycle, has minimal or no visible markings identifying him as law enforcement, and generally completely hides behind something (a bridge or other large abutment is usually used). Obviously, they make no attempt at all to stop the driver upon "witnessing" an infraction. Ergo, the driver has no idea that he has been cited and no opportunity to collect evidence that might disprove the charge.
Oh, yeah, and (at least in Toledo) the municipal code states that the picture alone is "prima facie evidence of guilt."
This is inarguably about revenue enhancement and has nothing at all to do with law enforcement. Yeah...I'm pretty much opposed to this. And, no, I do *not* agree that the answer is "don't speed and you won't get a ticket." Anyone who might tell you that radar (or laser, for that matter) is 100% accurate and that there is never an error is either 1) lying or 2) lying. There are any number of things wrong with photo "traffic enforcement" but, most importantly, I have a significant issue with any situation that requires the accused to prove their innocence versus the government proving guilt.
//rant off...
Meanwhile, back on topic...there should be a mechanism whereby you can "claim" that you were not operating the vehicle at the time of the "infraction." Of course, to do that, you will be required to identify who *was* operating the vehicle. Don't want to do that? Then you're on the hook for the fine.
NRA Benefactor Life Member
Information posted in these forums is my personal opinion only. It is not intended, nor should it be construed, as legal advice.
Information posted in these forums is my personal opinion only. It is not intended, nor should it be construed, as legal advice.
-
- Posts: 1191
- Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:59 pm
- Contact:
Re: photo traffic ticket
Request a photograph of the driver and state that you were not using the vehicle that day and can't remember who was. Because you were not the operator of the vehicle, it'd be tough for them to get the money out of you. I know I wouldn't pay.
Good luck and stand fast, true Patriots.
TDwin
TDwin
-
- Posts: 518
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:51 am
- Location: SW Ohio
- Contact:
Re: photo traffic ticket
OP, check your PM. if you want, I will send you some 'form letters' which I and at least 4 others I personally know have used in this same situation with red-light cameras.
If you look, the citation is not actually a violation of any Ohio revised code traffic law, it is a violation of some municipal ordinance and is basically a civil matter unless you agree to give this 'hearing officer' authority to punish you that Ohio law doesn't give him. They just want you to agree to play by the flawed rules they have put in place and once you agree to play outside of Ohio law, you loose.
It is really just a 'who will bluff first' situation which goes something like this.
-They send you letter saying you owe for citation
-You send one back saying it wasn't you
-They send one saying tell us who was it or you owe for citation
-You say "I don't know"
-They say well you owe us anyway
-You say it wasn't me
-They say you owe us anyway and we will report to credit agency if you don't pay
-You say the the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of 1976 says you are committing a crime if you actually report this to the credit agency without proof it was me.
-They go away
Now YMMV if they followed Ohio law and actually had an officer there at the camera.
JLE
If you look, the citation is not actually a violation of any Ohio revised code traffic law, it is a violation of some municipal ordinance and is basically a civil matter unless you agree to give this 'hearing officer' authority to punish you that Ohio law doesn't give him. They just want you to agree to play by the flawed rules they have put in place and once you agree to play outside of Ohio law, you loose.
It is really just a 'who will bluff first' situation which goes something like this.
-They send you letter saying you owe for citation
-You send one back saying it wasn't you
-They send one saying tell us who was it or you owe for citation
-You say "I don't know"
-They say well you owe us anyway
-You say it wasn't me
-They say you owe us anyway and we will report to credit agency if you don't pay
-You say the the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of 1976 says you are committing a crime if you actually report this to the credit agency without proof it was me.
-They go away
Now YMMV if they followed Ohio law and actually had an officer there at the camera.
JLE
- Mr. Glock
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 8965
- Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
- Location: NE Ohio
Re: photo traffic ticket
The National.Motorists Association - the folks who really drove the repeal of the 55 mph national maximum.speed limit- may be an organization you.might want to check.out. Lots on photo enforcement and what to do about it.
Kind of quaint, for our younger readers, that the US Gov told us all that no where in the US could you travel.more than 55 mph. To save the polar bears (wait, back then it was the coming ice age) and the children. Because safety. Stay.alive, drive 55. They even mandated a special 55 marker on the speedometer, that also couldn't read.more than 85 mph. Because safety. And control.
Kind of quaint, for our younger readers, that the US Gov told us all that no where in the US could you travel.more than 55 mph. To save the polar bears (wait, back then it was the coming ice age) and the children. Because safety. Stay.alive, drive 55. They even mandated a special 55 marker on the speedometer, that also couldn't read.more than 85 mph. Because safety. And control.
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
-
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 19033
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:08 am
- Location: NEO
Re: photo traffic ticket
PO box in Arizona? SOunds like a scam to me...
Life is full of God given coincidences..
A MEMBER OF OFCC SINCE 2004...
Thanks for shopping at Charmin Carmens
A MEMBER OF OFCC SINCE 2004...
Thanks for shopping at Charmin Carmens
- Mr. Glock
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 8965
- Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
- Location: NE Ohio
Re: photo traffic ticket
The companies that run the red.light cameras "revenue share" with the local town, and the company processes the whole program. It is just a money grab. In fact, rear end accidents increase where red light cameras are in place.carmen fovozzo wrote:PO box in Arizona? SOunds like a scam to me...
OFCC Patron, GOA, SAF, YouTube 2A Patreon, NRA Benefactor Life & Hot Stove League Member
- djthomas
- Posts: 5961
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Re: photo traffic ticket
Cleveland residents did everyone a solid a few years ago when they amended the city charter against the city's wishes to require that all cameras have a law enforcement officer present to personally observe the violation and personally serve the citation at the time and place of the violation. The cameras were turned off the next day and taken down by the Arizona vendor within a month.
The difference between this law and the state law is twofold: The state law is still undergoing legal challenge on home rule grounds, by definition a duly enacted municipal charter amendment prohibiting that municipality from doing something is the ultimate exercise of home rule. So even if the state law is struck down, Cleveland will not be getting its cameras back. Second, the charter amendment goes beyond state law and not only requires the officer to be present, as sodbuster rants, but also requires that he personally serve the citation on the spot. In other words, no different than a real traffic stop.
The difference between this law and the state law is twofold: The state law is still undergoing legal challenge on home rule grounds, by definition a duly enacted municipal charter amendment prohibiting that municipality from doing something is the ultimate exercise of home rule. So even if the state law is struck down, Cleveland will not be getting its cameras back. Second, the charter amendment goes beyond state law and not only requires the officer to be present, as sodbuster rants, but also requires that he personally serve the citation on the spot. In other words, no different than a real traffic stop.
- Bruenor
- Posts: 7306
- Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
- Location: Geneva, OH
Re: photo traffic ticket
In Cleveland I think the argument was that everyone has the right to confront their accuser. If there is no officer present there is no-one you can confront in the courtroom. I believe that's how they got the change stating an officer had to be present for the ticket to be valid.
Μολὼν λαβέ
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
- Thomas Jefferson
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."
- Thomas Jefferson
-
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 19033
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:08 am
- Location: NEO
Re: photo traffic ticket
steves 50de wrote:I' am the person the car is registered to and it was another family member using the car that day. That city would like me to send them 200.00 bucks for the speeding infraction Not sure I agree with this type of inforcement. I have to send the money to a p.o box in Arizona in two weeks.
I still think it's a scam and not legit. And you're spelling is terrible...enforcement with a E... what goes around comes around..
Life is full of God given coincidences..
A MEMBER OF OFCC SINCE 2004...
Thanks for shopping at Charmin Carmens
A MEMBER OF OFCC SINCE 2004...
Thanks for shopping at Charmin Carmens
-
- Posts: 3918
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:04 am
- Location: Cincinnati/SW Ohio
Re: photo traffic ticket
Only one way to find out the answer to all your questions - and that is to tell whomever "Bleep You" - then wait and see what happens. It is what I'd do if I were in your shoes
Give em' Hell Pike!!!
- djthomas
- Posts: 5961
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Re: photo traffic ticket
This was not a court case, this was a citizen initiative to pass a charter amendment at the ballot box. I don't know exactly how the advocates campaigned and all the arguments they raised but from what I remember the thrust of it was that the whole scheme was a tax on the poor since the cameras were on the main thoroughfares passing through the predominantly black, east side neighborhoods. Constitutional rights to confront one's accusers and whatnot were probably in the "advanced" campaign literature. Regardless, they were effective.Bruenor wrote:In Cleveland I think the argument was that everyone has the right to confront their accuser. If there is no officer present there is no-one you can confront in the courtroom. I believe that's how they got the change stating an officer had to be present for the ticket to be valid.
-
- Posts: 16229
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
- Location: SW Ohio
Re: photo traffic ticket
I deliberately drove a fire vehicle over the speed limit of 25mph in a town that at the time had those unattended speed cameras. Not on a call, either, I just wanted to see what would happen. Nothing ever came of it. Too bad, I had a great excuse ready: The speedometer on that truck was broken, and had been for a while.
Last edited by Brian D. on Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.