Red light camera

[it_mike]

Does this exemption from personal responsibility also apply if he had caused a wreck or otherwise injured or killed someone during that trip?

Did he actually cause a wreck or otherwise injure or kill someone?   You've just hit on my number one issue regarding our 'nanny state'.  We're punishing people for what 'might have happened' rather than dealing with what actually occurred. We're being regulated to idiocy. Where does it stop? At what point are we to be trusted to make judgment decisions?

[Tim Strommen]

Don't you think that you can just as well be sued in California for not helping?

From the same Case law listed on my previous post, on PDF page 13 about half way down:

"...As we previously noted, the general rule is that 'one has no duty to come to the aid of another.' (Williams v. State of California, supra, 34 Cal.3d at p. 23.)..."

There is a ton of case law around this point in CA, and the federal civl rights "life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness" don't include "and everyone will be obligated to help you if you get into trouble" - that's just life I guess...

-T

[Lin]

That would certainly apply to criminal law, but lawsuits can be about anything.  Anyway, by saying it is a "general rule" would seem to leave room for what could be argued to be exceptional.

[lily]

Out of interest, do American speed limits generally apply to all vehicles, or do different types of vehicle have different speed limits on the same road?

It varies by state. California has lower highway limits for trucks and buses, for example, but neighboring Arizona does not.

Lily

[kyle4501]

You have missed my point entirely & changed the subject in the process.
My point is that the traffic lights & speed limits are there to promote general safety & that someones 'emergency' does not place them above anyone else. It is a fact that speeding & running red lights increases your chances of a collision.

If you've already got one emergency, why in the world would you want to risk adding a few more just for the sake of a few minutes? As for me, if I decided a few minutes was worth the risk, then I would 'man up' & accept the ticket without fanfare. I'd then ask for mercy from the court. That is what I'm trying to endors here - write up the violations & discuss later in court after things have cooled down to decide what sticks & what is dismissed.

As for " punishing people for what 'might have happened' ", I was merely pointing out the existence of a double standard, & lets face it, driving while distracted about weather or not you're gonna make it there in time ain't the best recipe for success. I am curious how tolerant you'd be to 'personal emergency' violations if you were involved as secondary collateral damage?

There is a significant part of the population that proves every day that they can't / won't make reasonable 'judgment decisions' & it is those people that cause the idiotic regulation.

Did he actually cause a wreck or otherwise injure or kill someone?   You've just hit on my number one issue regarding our 'nanny state'.  We're punishing people for what 'might have happened' rather than dealing with what actually occurred. We're being regulated to idiocy. Where does it stop? At what point are we to be trusted to make judgment decisions?

[Len Silva]

Emergency vehicles don't normally blow through a light.  They come to nearly a full stop and do not continue until they are sure the traffic has seen them and has come to a stop.

As far as the police are concerned, they only enforce the law, not determine guilt or innocence.  If I were in that position, I would expect to get a ticket for running the light, then I would expect the judge to dismiss it.  It's not up to the cop.

[cody]

The bottom line here is that yellow means caution, prepare to stop, not speed up and beat the light if you can, red means stop. if you are already in the intersection under the yellow most officers will let you go thru, I can't think of a single time we instructed anyone to stop and back up.  In michigan policy and procedure for emergency vehicles is to respond to an emergency at the fastest speed that can be safely done with the key word here being safe, no emergency vehicle is instructed to ignore red lights, but they are empowered to proceed thru them if it can be done safely, this is a touchy subject to me cause as a rookie officer back in the early 70's, I was the officer driving the car in a high speed chase where we were rammed by the car, my partner darryl Rantanen was killed in the wreck and I was laid up for a bunch of time doing foolish things like learning to walk again, stuff like that so it's entirely possible that I may be overly sensitive or cautious about this subject.  In my opinion if you get caught running a red light, pay the ticket and be glad you didn't get hit or hit anyone else.

[Len Silva]

.

[Lin]

There is a difference between "running a red light" and proceeding through one if it safe to do so.  Certainly, we can not expect a camera to understand that or an emergency need, but an officer can.  It is rather insulting to law enforcement to say they are too stupid to be expected to be capable of evaluating specific situations.  I'm sure everyone has sat at a completely deserted intersection in the middle of the night waiting for a light to change.  I would hope that anyone involved in an emergency, even one as minor as labor, would have the sense to cautiously move on.  I would also expect any police present to be able to differentiate between what is important and what amounts to a legal formality.  We are talking about traffic laws, not divine revelation!

Anyway, the incident I mentioned was in Chicago in the 1970's sometime between 2 and 4 in the morning.  The robber put the gun to the cabbies head and pulled the trigger.  It did not go off.  The victim then began to try to wrestle the gun out of the perp's hand.  It went off and the bullet went through his neck.  The assailant fled and he drove himself to the hospital.  One of Chicago's finest tried to pull him over but dropped back and just followed him when he saw the blood spurting from his neck.  Anyone that says they would have stopped at empty intersections for unnecessary lights or would have strictly observed the speed limit is pushing the borders of credibility.

[rwc]

This Horse has been beat enough. As always we have proved that we are as varied in our opinions as everyone else even if we are all busnuts. Lets put this one to bed. Thanks

[jackhartjr]

I thought about replying to this thread...however some folks here might ban me FOREVER should I put down my thoughts!
But I will say this...4 years ago on a trip to Miami and back, (From Hickory, NC) I might see about 8 to 10 folks getting tickets, mostly for speeding...now it is more like 50 to 60.  Wonder if that is because of falling tax revenues because folks are out of work and aren't buying stuff like they did?  As the "Churchlady" would say..."Could it be"?!

[cody]

Jack brought up an interesting point so I went digging lol, I hit the local state police post here in L'Anse and along with the luitenent, we dug up some stats, this past june, 56 warnings were issued for traffic infractions and 127 tickets were written, we could only go back 5 years on their computer but in june 2005 119 warnings were issued and 47 tickets written, patrol miles were simular but traffic patterns were listed as being heavier mainly I think due to economic conditions at that time being somewhat better. I think we all can agree that as sources of revenues dry up, fewer warnings will be given, bear in mind that a violation is still a violation and regardless on how we may feel about the law, it is still on the books and can be enforced, a warning is still a charitable act on the part of the officer.  In a perfect world we wouldn't have the laws to deal with but we live far from a perfect world and we still don't have the option of picking and choosing which laws apply to us or which ones we'll ignore and what circumstances allow us to ignore them.

[Lin]

we still don't have the option of picking and choosing which laws apply to us or which ones we'll ignore and what circumstances allow us to ignore them.

That derned Rosa Parks!

[cody]

And that durned Charlie Manson

[eddiepotts]

Here is the link for the news clip with the city sending out letters on registrations not being honored

http://www.myfoxhouston.com/dpp/news/local/100715-groups-clash-over-red-light-cameras

This is a must see on corruption in our law enforcement.