Are the "Big Brother" cameras legal?
Speaking of the ugly black booths, the cameras above them may be illegal if they are being used for traffic. At least that is what a judge has said about the cameras in Aventura.
Another waste of taxpayer dollars.
Maybe we can throw baseballs at the cameras and try to destroy them as another part of the our black information booth sledgehammer knock down money raiser.
Another waste of taxpayer dollars.
Maybe we can throw baseballs at the cameras and try to destroy them as another part of the our black information booth sledgehammer knock down money raiser.
posted by Tom Falco at 2:00 PM
YOU MAY NOT LIFT THE PHOTOS & TEXT. IT'S COPYRIGHTED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. YOU CAN HOWEVER SHARE A STORY ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY USING THE LINKS HERE.
For linking to this one story, just click on the time it was posted & just this story will open for sharing - only through social media. Not copying and pasting.
9 Comments:
Traffic cameras are an excellent way to relieve undue congestion, and improve safety significantly.
If you've never lived in a metropolitan area that uses them, you don't know what you're missing! No more gridlock, ridiculous 3-cars-passing after the light's already turned red, etc.
I speak from experience living and driving in the Maryland/Wash. D.C. area both before and after the red-light cameras were installed. There was a period of time where their legality was questioned, but ultimately they stayed and are an asset to the district.
Miami would do well to install these everywhere. After all, it's not like the cops are going to take the time to stop red-light runners.
CAuse - have you seen what's happened with these systems in other jurisdictions? It's not good, and the law is at best unclear as to their legality. In Florida particularly, where we have a constitutional right to privacy (Fla. Const. not fed.), this strikes me as an invasion.
Another issue is that these are not government run or controlled, but rather handled by private industry which takes on avg 40% of the generated revenue - that in and of itself raises red flags and judicial scrutiny.
Finally, there is the practical reality of it. The will of the people just simply will not abide. Check out Phoenix, AZ in that regard. People just refuse to abide and pay them. The enforcement is difficult and they are often beat in court for a multitude of reasons. And that leads to unnecessary congestion of our already crowded court and law enforcement resources.
In short - bad idea with more failure on record than success.
That Guy....
Boy, have I been miising you.
As usual you're always spot on.
Thanks for always contributing common sense to these discussion.
You're a man who knows his stuff!
They are probably illegal; certainly you might not like them but don't throw baseballs at them, that might get you in jail
Hi all...A tizzy over this? Puh-lease! Do some research before working yourselves into a coronary.
These don't look like traffic ticket cams. Take a look at the pictures from the Aventura installation. Those are multi-camera setups, mounted much higher than these cams and have strobe like flash units which capture license plates.
While the pros/cons will be sorted out in time, these actually look like the kind of CCTV cams in other major cities and what FDOT has on I-95, US1 and other highways. In fact didn’t the former Chief of the Miami Police Department start a CCTV program?
Instead of freaking out, think about the potential benefits…these things may actually prove useful and catch a glimpse of the rapist or the pesky kids asking for money to support their school-whatever it is.
If you run a red light and a camera or cop is not there - are you still breaking the law.... YES. A resounding YES. It does not matter, this is society, and if we, you, I, anyone breaks its laws, we agree to be "punished", or we can leave society.
It's clear. How can a camera, who catches someone doing something illegal be wrong - when and what circumstances? Our court systems allows photographic evidence, and often it's required at a traffic accident - oh, let's make sure that's now illegal too.... Yes Judge I have photos of the wreck..... "Oh, that is no longer allowed... because it might just proved what happened..."
Where is the common sense? The case in Adventura - did you see the video - the guy ran a red light - simple. And he did it twice before calling a lawyer - so if you have a check book you can fight.
I give up! It's not like the police are running around giving tickets - really.
If you so choose to run a red light - you can pay the fine - it's truly simple.
I think having CCTV in the grove is a benefit,considering I was ROBBED at GUNPOINT last week. Maybe some evidence will motivate the police to do their job...
Anon 1:36 - were you robbed in the grove? Were you robbed in the grove under the cameras?
Do you think criminals would rob/rape/steal/peddle their wares - directly under a camera????
That's just stupid. Even the dumbest criminal will know to simply commit his crime anywhere but that 10 ft. area.
So, do you want every square inch to be recorded? and who will pay for, watch, catalogue and sort all this footage? Who's allowed to see it? Who wants to basically ban privacy on that level?
ps. I think you're making it up.
The subject matter of this law being ruled on is this: Cities are not issuing tickets as traffic citations, rather, the tickets are called code violations which can be issued by city authority. But, in Florida, presently only the legislature can regulate traffic throughout Florida, not cities or counties. It use to be all of the equipment including the cameras were high up on some pole somewhere, but that was ruled illegal, so the cities placed all equipment, other than the camera in some box, like some FP&L box on the easement so it could then be called a code violation. This money machine/business is a private enterprise and I think the city get about 57% of the take.
Post a Comment
<< Home