everyone needs to practice civil disobedience with bullshit like this-fear is the mind-killer.
Mail it back to them and tell them to fuck off.

better-have a friend ride in the trunk, and when you run the light, he/she will be there in the back, one hand over the plates, and the other with the universal symbol of disapproval, for all to see.

I agree it's ridiculous to expect the ticket-receiver to do the police work of finding out who actually was driving the car. I don't understand though how you leap from that to banning all traffic cameras. I would have just filed a stolen vehicle report with the police and let them figure out which mechanic did it.

The camera is a deterrent as you're much less likely to gun it at that yellow and hope you make it in time if you know it's there (and most of them have signs that tell you in big bold letters that they are there). On top of that, the camera provides solid proof of a violation being committed. The constitution doesn't protect you from someone taking a picture or video of you committing a crime. If some anonymous person turned in the photo clearly showing the violation, the result would have been exactly the same for this guy. What's he going to do, ban people from taking pictures of moving vehicles next? The problem here is not the camera but the appeals process. Once someone provides proof that they didn't commit the violation it should be up to the cops to determine who actually did.

Oh, and don't get me started on how badly the legal system is misrepresented by pretty much everyone they interviewed for this piece. There is no place in the constitution that requires citizens to report a crime. There may, however, be local laws that say something to that effect. But the guy in the vid makes it sound like the constitution requires it. Also, the guy saying his accuser is a machine is absolutely wrong. His accuser is the state, as represented by the prosecutor/district attorney, based on evidence PROVIDED by the machine. If he's going to say that's unfair because you can't cross-examine a machine then I guess he's never heard of "expert witnesses" who will testify to the validity of the vast amount of forensic evidence provided by machines, such as DNA testing.

Nicely summed up, SDGundamX.

I don't see the link bridging increased surveillance and policing with the notion of a police state and fascism. The former must exist in the latter, but the former does not imply the latter.

Secrecy and a lack of transparency on the other hand is an entirely different matter.

My understanding, Blankfist, is the fifth amendment keeps you from testifying against at your own trial. Once you've gotten on the stand (or are in a position to speak to a judge) you've waived this right. You can't say, "I want to answer some questions, but I may decide not to answer others." The only exception is if it's someone else's trial and your guilt is brought into question.

Here's the part of the fifth that pertains to us: "...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."

To be honest, giving the repair shop name and proof that it was there at that time should be enough. I think the whole thing is ridiculous. The police are ridiculous for expecting a citizen to get information that should NOT be available to him (personal information about those working at the repair shop) and this guy is ridiculous for making a mountain out of a mole hill. Seriously, post a cop on that corner 24/7? Get real.

I would suggest that big brother update the camera system to photograph the entire vehicle including the driver and also the traffic light.

Yes, the cop 24/7 thing is ridiculous, but it isn't the guy up there being ridiculous, it's the city. They have a camera there 24/7 which has now been PROVEN to be misused by the authorities (accusing an innocent man of a crime). Basically they have a lazy-ass cop on that corner 24/7 now, who just can't be bothered to chase down a lawbreaker.. just take a picture and mail it to him.

This whole thing should be tossed out of court, and if it wasn't for the revenue generated it would have been I have no doubt.

C'Mon, Blankfist... atrocious fascism?? Seriously? Yes, it's bullshit he had to do the footwork to prove his innocence past proving that he wasn't in the state. But to say that a camera that took a photo of your car blowing a red light is an "invasion of privacy" is fucking ridiculous. If there were cameras pointing in your house to see if you were fucking your dog, then yeah, that would be an invasion of privacy. But this is a public road. Get that part? PUBLIC.

This system works, though the appeal process might not. Yeah, it generates revenue. But if you just OBEY THE FUCKING LAW and DON'T FUCKING SPEED, then you have absolutely nothing to be afraid of.

To say that these cameras are a "lazy cop" or a speed trap or anything other than a safety device or a crime deterrent (yes, speeding is a crime, that's why it's against the law) is absurd. Like they said in the video, major accidents have dropped significantly since the arrival of the system.

I vote for anything that punishes a law breaker where they would normally get away with it. Especially if it generates revenue for the city.

But yeah, that cop was a moron, and yeah, the process is fucked up.

And I'm not gonna change them (tags) because it's your video, but this really has nothing to do with civil rights, freedom and MOTHERFUCKING fascism.

And please, PLEASE fucking SOMEONE tell me how getting caught breaking the law is fascism. "Fascism: system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism."

Can we all drop this WAY overused catchphrase now?

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by eric3579.