Red light cameras coming to the Metro

[Brad]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

2.  I also like the cameras in these Economic times.  We need more Police, actually we need A LOT MORE POLICE!  So having these red light cameras frees up officers to work on real crime.

3.  I really don't care about public cameras infringing on my rights, I don't do stuff illegal, if  I did, I deserve to get caught.

[DTO Luv]

What part of "in public" don't you understand? IF you want to do something illegal, do it in your own home, if you do it in public you should expect to be caught, frankly, a lot of crime can be solved with better camera coverage. Working for the store I do, because of our cameras I always feel 100% secure at all times, but tell me to park across the street, and suddenly I'm looking over at my car every other minute to be sure it hasn't been stolen. If public places were covered by cameras more regularly it would be a more safe environment free of the he-said she-said arguements that tie up our justice system. Should there be cameras everywhere? certainly not. There is such a thing as privacy, but installing a camera or two on our busiest intersections is hardly a breach of privacy.

Well that's part of the problem right there. Extra "security" makes people paranoid when they have no reason to be.

Also just because there's cameras doesn't mean it's going to stop people. Why is there always video footage of places being robbed and ending up unsolved cases?

And who's to say what the cameras should monitor? Are we going to make them check for litterers too? People not wearing seatbelts? People smoking in cars with kids? The street may be public but the vehicle is private but this opens the door for the law to start using the cameras to enforce other "crimes".

[Brad]

And who's to say what the cameras should monitor? Are we going to make them check for litterers too? People not wearing seatbelts? People smoking in cars with kids? The street may be public but the vehicle is private but this opens the door for the law to start using the cameras to enforce other "crimes".

I wish they would enforce littering with cameras.  It upsets me off to no end to see pointless litter.  That's just plan old disrespect!

As far as enforcing other crimes, big cities have police cameras all over the place.

[DTO Luv]

Getting caught has nothing to do with it. It's red lights now but I'm not fond of the idea of cameras being used to catch crimes in such public areas. If a private place wants to install security cameras fine but I don't think that this level of public spying in the name of preventing crime is acceptable.

You're not fond of having solid evidence a crime took place?  I think the evidence of these cameras is more solid than the testimony of a police officer.

BUT....

I wonder how the recent supreme court ruling on evidence would relate to the enforcement of these fines:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

Legal experts and prosecutors are concerned about the results of last month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that requires lab analysts to be in court to testify about their tests. Lab sheets that identify a substance as a narcotic or breath-test printouts describing a suspect's blood-alcohol level are no longer sufficient evidence, the court ruled. A person must be in court to talk about the test results.

The opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, has prosecutors and judges shaking their heads in disgust and defense lawyers nodding with satisfaction at the notion that the Constitution's Sixth Amendment guarantee that defendants "shall enjoy the right . . . to be confronted with the witnesses against him" is not satisfied by a sheet of paper.

The percentage of cases going to trial could well go up if defense lawyers think that bringing lab analysts to court will help their cases. Lawyers also could go to trial with the hope of a dismissal if the analyst cannot be there.

If you wanted to fight your ticket, would the court be compelled to require an analyst from the camera manufacturer to testify about the evidence?

When I got one of those tickets it wasn't even the CB police department that was monitoring them. It was some police officer in Arizona that sent me the ticket. I don't know how that works.

[TechnicalDisaster]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

You want to remove all the oversight because of a fat check?  That mentality scares the |expletive| out of me.  

2.  I also like the cameras in these Economic times.  We need more Police, actually we need A LOT MORE POLICE!  So having these red light cameras frees up officers to work on real crime.

Probably not.  We don't have cops stationed 24/7 at the worst intersections today.  The cops would set up the same amount of traps elsewhere.

3.  I really don't care about public cameras infringing on my rights, I don't do stuff illegal, if  I did, I deserve to get caught.

A camera stationed in a public place isn't infringing on your rights.  You would certainly not agree to a camera placed where it does.

[DTO Luv]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

2.  I also like the cameras in these Economic times.  We need more Police, actually we need A LOT MORE POLICE!  So having these red light cameras frees up officers to work on real crime.

3.  I really don't care about public cameras infringing on my rights, I don't do stuff illegal, if  I did, I deserve to get caught.

- So it's ok to crack down on people just for money? What about justice? Or is that for sale now?

- How much time does the OPD spend on red light enforcement now? If they would actually gain significant manpower out of the exchange I would maybe buy that argument but I doubt they do a lot of it now.

- It doesn't matter if you're doing anything illegal or not. The law/government has no right to spy on you like that. It's that kind of thinking that is a symbol of oppression in the countries who's governments we despise. Should everyone in China have there internet monitored because some people might be doing something illegal? Just because it's not you doing whatever doesn't make it ok.


Those citywide crime cams are stupid. If people know the cameras are out there they're not going to not do the crime. They're just going to go somewhere else. Crime not reduced. At that point it's all just escalation and neither side gains ground.

[Brad]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

You want to remove all the oversight because of a fat check?  That mentality scares the |expletive| out of me.  

Oversight?  You get a picture of yourself in the mail, how much oversite does one need?

[2Adam29]

Well that's part of the problem right there. Extra "security" makes people paranoid when they have no reason to be.

Also just because there's cameras doesn't mean it's going to stop people. Why is there always video footage of places being robbed and ending up unsolved cases?

And who's to say what the cameras should monitor? Are we going to make them check for litterers too? People not wearing seatbelts? People smoking in cars with kids? The street may be public but the vehicle is private but this opens the door for the law to start using the cameras to enforce other "crimes".

I'm just saying that the cameras in our store put me at ease, because it makes crimes much easier to prosecute. if someone leaves our store and steals my car, one of two things will happen, at a store with cameras they would trace the individual back to his exiting the store and use the face shot to give to police who will easily run it through their database of theft suspects, at a store without cameras, you file a report and go home crying because there is no evidence to aid police in locating your vehicle.

While the system isn't fail-proof and on occassion ends unsolved, it is multiple times better with hard video evidence to find a criminal.

Also, we aren't talking about people littering. I've never heard of littering killing anyone. I HAVE however heard of running a red light killing someone, in fact, it's what half the car accidents on the news are about.

[TechnicalDisaster]

When I got one of those tickets it wasn't even the CB police department that was monitoring them. It was some police officer in Arizona that sent me the ticket. I don't know how that works.

The supreme court upheld your right to face your accuser.  If you're caught with a suspected illegal substance, it is sent to a lab to confirm what it is.  The lab would send the results to the court and be accepted.  Defendants weren't given the opportunity to face the people in the lab.  If this ruling was applied to these speeding tickets, you have the right to face the person who reviewed the evidence and sent you a ticket at your trial.  I expect someone to claim this ASAP.

That guy from Arizona would have to come to Omaha to offer his testimony.  That isn't bloody likely to happen, so your case would be dismissed.

[DTO Luv]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

You want to remove all the oversight because of a fat check?  That mentality scares the |expletive| out of me.  

Oversight?  You get a picture of yourself in the mail, how much oversite does one need?

What if someone borrows your car or it's stolen. So you should be on the hook for that for quick money? There's a reason we try to have a legal system that doesn't just steamroll you.

[DTO Luv]

Well that's part of the problem right there. Extra "security" makes people paranoid when they have no reason to be.

Also just because there's cameras doesn't mean it's going to stop people. Why is there always video footage of places being robbed and ending up unsolved cases?

And who's to say what the cameras should monitor? Are we going to make them check for litterers too? People not wearing seatbelts? People smoking in cars with kids? The street may be public but the vehicle is private but this opens the door for the law to start using the cameras to enforce other "crimes".

I'm just saying that the cameras in our store put me at ease, because it makes crimes much easier to prosecute. if someone leaves our store and steals my car, one of two things will happen, at a store with cameras they would trace the individual back to his exiting the store and use the face shot to give to police who will easily run it through their database of theft suspects, at a store without cameras, you file a report and go home crying because there is no evidence to aid police in locating your vehicle.

While the system isn't fail-proof and on occassion ends unsolved, it is multiple times better with hard video evidence to find a criminal.

Also, we aren't talking about people littering. I've never heard of littering killing anyone. I HAVE however heard of running a red light killing someone, in fact, it's what half the car accidents on the news are about.

I'm not talking about private companies use of cameras on their own properties. That's ok. I'm against the public doing it to private people.

[TechnicalDisaster]

1.  I don't care that they get a fee from every ticket written, It comes down to no worries from the city, just a monthly check, aka Free Money.

You want to remove all the oversight because of a fat check?  That mentality scares the |expletive| out of me.  

Oversight?  You get a picture of yourself in the mail, how much oversite does one need?

Red light cameras are to improve public safety, not line the coffers of the government.  This will turn into the gambling problem.  Have a casino and want to raise revenue?  Expand gambling.   Have red light cameras and want to raise revenue? Expand the cameras.  The city shouldn't be solving its budget crises by finding more ways to involuntarily tax people.  On a related note, I also vehemently disagree with the mayors plan to increase the fines for Fire department false alarms.

[DTO Luv]

You don't get a picture of yourself in the car. You just get a picture of the vehicle.

[2Adam29]

What if someone borrows your car or it's stolen. So you should be on the hook for that for quick money? There's a reason we try to have a legal system that doesn't just steamroll you.

That's why I don't give my car out to people, and if I did, it would only be to people I trust to drive responsibly.

Geez... seems like common sense, but you want everyone else to pick up the tab for your lack of responsibility... Be law abiding, don't lend out your car to irresponsible people, and you'll be fine. I don't understand why you find this so damn difficult...

[Bosco55David]

I'm torn on these.  While I get what they're doing, they are so fundamentally un-Constitutional it isn't even funny.  

I think cities would be better off hiring a Traffic Patrol to cruise around in a fleet of Priuses (Priui?) and just hand out $25 no-point fines for all the stupid little |expletive| that thousands of drivers do all day every day.

Just curious, but why would you use a Prius for traffic patrol?

[DTO Luv]

What if someone borrows your car or it's stolen. So you should be on the hook for that for quick money? There's a reason we try to have a legal system that doesn't just steamroll you.

That's why I don't give my car out to people, and if I did, it would only be to people I trust to drive responsibly.

Geez... seems like common sense, but you want everyone else to pick up the tab for your lack of responsibility... Be law abiding, don't lend out your car to irresponsible people, and you'll be fine. I don't understand why you find this so darn difficult...

Just because you let someone you deem responsible to use your car doesn't mean they're being responsible with it. The law has to make room for the most extreme of circumstances. Not everything is so cut and dry.

[MTO]

Hey people it could be worse.  Someday we may have every square meter of the metro in view of an entire network of HD cameras.  Similar to those european cities.  It's always interesting how this discussion brings out the paranoid ones.  If you don't do anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about but if you are paranoid then maybe you are for a reason.

My ideology has always been against authority however that doesn't make me fear it just challenge it.  There are good things these cameras can do for us citizens.

[2Adam29]

What if someone borrows your car or it's stolen. So you should be on the hook for that for quick money? There's a reason we try to have a legal system that doesn't just steamroll you.

That's why I don't give my car out to people, and if I did, it would only be to people I trust to drive responsibly.

Geez... seems like common sense, but you want everyone else to pick up the tab for your lack of responsibility... Be law abiding, don't lend out your car to irresponsible people, and you'll be fine. I don't understand why you find this so darn difficult...

Just because you let someone you deem responsible to use your car doesn't mean they're being responsible with it. The law has to make room for the most extreme of circumstances. Not everything is so cut and dry.

It's not the law's fault that you're a bad judge of how much of a responsible driver someone is... seriously, we don't need loopholes to cover your bad judgement.

[DTO Luv]

Those cameras don't take pictures of you. They take pictures of your car. If someone else is driving your car and runs the light they send the ticket to YOU. Not whoever is driving your car. There might even be times where you're the passenger in the car. What if your friend is the DD one night and runs a light. You should get a ticket?

They have a box on there where you can say it was someone else driving the car but it's a lot to fight it.

[2Adam29]

I don't think you're listening... it's YOUR CAR its YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. I haven't let ANYONE drive my car since I bought it. If they need to get somewhere, either I drive them, or they're out of luck. There are a few people I would trust to drive my car if it was nessessary, but that is because I have been in a car with them and know that they would be attentive enough to not break such a simple law. I'd never let you anywhere near my car because you clearly think laws are just made to keep you down.  :roll:

[DTO Luv]

I'm not saying the laws are there to keep people down. I strongly disagree with this method of enforcing the law.

[Big E]

Just curious, but why would you use a Prius for traffic patrol?

Fuel efficiency. I'm not proposing they be involved in high speed chases or anything.

[joeglow]

Those cameras don't take pictures of you. They take pictures of your car. If someone else is driving your car and runs the light they send the ticket to YOU. Not whoever is driving your car. There might even be times where you're the passenger in the car. What if your friend is the DD one night and runs a light. You should get a ticket?

They have a box on there where you can say it was someone else driving the car but it's a lot to fight it.

Wow.  You loan the car to someone who runs a red light, gets a ticket and then refuses to pay for it.  Either you are a REAL crappy judge of responsibility or have some terrible friends.

[MTO]

If I remember correct some people have sued over the use of these cameras so there may be some hope.  Although it would never be worth it.  But if your clever enough there may be way of beating the system.  

Big Brother should disappear.

[DTO Luv]

Those cameras don't take pictures of you. They take pictures of your car. If someone else is driving your car and runs the light they send the ticket to YOU. Not whoever is driving your car. There might even be times where you're the passenger in the car. What if your friend is the DD one night and runs a light. You should get a ticket?

They have a box on there where you can say it was someone else driving the car but it's a lot to fight it.

Wow.  You loan the car to someone who runs a red light, gets a ticket and then refuses to pay for it.  Either you are a REAL crappy judge of responsibility or have some terrible friends.

If your whoever is using your car doesn't pay the ticket then the law will come after them, not you. BUT you may have a hard time pinning it on the driver. That's probably something you married people that drive the same car should think about.

[Bosco55David]

Just curious, but why would you use a Prius for traffic patrol?

Fuel efficiency. I'm not proposing they be involved in high speed chases or anything.

I was never concerned about fuel efficiency in police vehicles, especially after the unmitigated disaster that the Impalas are as police vehicles. I thank my lucky stars that OPD is holding onto the Crown Vic. Bigger, faster and safer is the way to go.

And if anything, the Prius would even be more out of place as a traffic enforcement vehicle. That job is usually left to fast cars (Charger, Maruader, Mustang) or very common vehicles (Explorer, pick up trucks) and the Prius is neither.

[bbinks]

My problem with this is the registrant of the car gets the ticket, not the driver.  Now I do not let anyone borrow my car, so this will not effect me, or will it?  I guess I would be the driver.   What about rental cars?  Or the occasional UPS or other 3rd party vehicle?

[bargainhunter]

My problem with this is the registrant of the car gets the ticket, not the driver.  Now I do not let anyone borrow my car, so this will not effect me, or will it?  I guess I would be the driver.   What about rental cars?  Or the occasional UPS or other 3rd party vehicle?

My husband was driving his work van & got a red light camera ticket.  Obviously the ticket went to his work, and they forwarded the cost of the ticket to him.

[cdub]

My problem with this is the registrant of the car gets the ticket, not the driver.  Now I do not let anyone borrow my car, so this will not effect me, or will it?  I guess I would be the driver.   What about rental cars?  Or the occasional UPS or other 3rd party vehicle?

My understanding is that these tickets don't count as points on a license so you'd only have to get the cash from the person who was driving to keep yourself whole.  If you can't do that they you probably shouldn't be lending jack to the person anyway.  

I only want to know where these are so I can pay attention.  I hate slamming on the breaks so I run some light red lights once in a while.

[icejammer]

Red Alert: More cameras to go up, fines on the rise

. . . the council will consider the installation of red-light cameras at more intersections around town. . . .  The proposal for new cameras would be for 30th Avenue and the South Expressway for both east and northbound motorists, Kanesville Boulevard and Harrison Street for east and westbound motorists and at 25th Street and West Broadway for east and westbound motorists.

The council will also consider increasing the fine for motorists caught running red lights. Currently, the fine is $65, which matched the state penalty when the program began four years ago. Since then, the state has increased the penalty twice and is now $106 that includes court costs and fees. The council will consider raising the local fine to match that figure.

[MTO]

This is hilarious.  

Two Arrested for Stealing Red Light Cameras.

A couple heroin junkies found out NYC used Nikon D2Xs for taking red light pictures.  So they went out got a cherry picker and stole over 20 of them.  LMAO some people are hella stupid, but you have to admit they can give you a good laugh.

Let's hope Omaha is smarter and uses Canons instead of those crappy Nikons.

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/07/22/ ... 248291371/

[DTO Luv]

Let's hope Omaha is smarter and uses Canons instead of those crappy Nikons.

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/07/22/ ... 248291371/

I can think of one dumbass Nikon user on here *cough*Wags*cough*.

[the1wags]

D'Shawn, don't you need to send in your Canon for repair, AGAIN????

Jake you should stick to taking shitty pictures with your Iphone.

[Brad]

D'Shawn, don't you need to send in your Canon for repair, AGAIN????

Jake you should stick to taking |expletive| pictures with your Iphone.

Who went to Rockbrook two days ago to get their Nikon lens fixed

[DTO Luv]

D'Shawn, don't you need to send in your Canon for repair, AGAIN????

Jake you should stick to taking |expletive| pictures with your Iphone.

No camera can withstand my photographic might!

[the1wags]

That's because I packed it full of sand at Great Sand Dune Nat Park, not because of it failing by itself.

D'Shawn you should get a D700, perfect camera for you.

[DTO Luv]

As soon as Nikon makes a camera that I like ergonomically I'll jump ship.

[MTO]

It's iPhone 3G S to you Mr. Warender.

[barattataxicab]

I think red light cameras are ok, if they are used properly and hairs are not split.

[bargainhunter]

I think red light cameras are ok, if they are used properly and hairs are not split.

Hairs have been split in my experience.  We were issued a ticket by a red light camera, but if a cop was watching the same thing happen, he wouldn't have given us a ticket for the violation.