"In California, many camera tickets can be ignored because the police are phishing for you to admit guilt. " Ah, what luxury. If you're issued a camera ticket here you're guilty and have to go through court process of proving your innocence. It puzzles me how that's legal in a country which is supposedly based on an "innocent until proven guilty" legal system.
If you choose to not pay the fine, your license gets suspended. If you say someone else was driving but do not nominate the driver, your license gets suspended. If the offence was a company owned vehicle the fine is issued to the "responsible operator of the business". I believe if they can't narrow it down to an individual then the registration (and third party personal insurance) of that vehicle is suspended.
Radar/laser detectors are of course illegal, since that just wouldn't be good sport...
Queensland has a lot of mobile speed cameras in vans or utes, and a few fixed cameras. They are introducing more fixed cameras including "point-to-point" (average speed) cameras.
There are plenty of red light cameras here, which I think are a good thing if yellow light times aren't tampered with, and there's little to suggest that happens here.
I loathe speed cameras and the barrage of "speed kills" government advertising that justifies them. It's raising an enormous amount of indirect tax, about $40m a year for Queensland and an obscene $470m a year for the state of Victoria, while at the same time breeding the attitude that if you stay below the speed limit that means you must be a good, safe driver
When I first read the title of this thread I thought it said "Camera speeding ticket in the mall"
I would personally rather have everyone else on the road doing 20+ over the speed limit (on highways... not city streets) than be cut off by drivers who don't head check or use turn signals.
To me, running red lights, broken tail/turn signals, and not using turn signals/head checking are of the most concern.
It just so happens it is easier to blame speeding and enforce that, instead of what actually constitutes unsafe driving.
Look at the autobahn, if speed was the problem, how come there aren't an astronomical amount of catastrophic accidents that occur there? I'm not saying driving too fast for conditions is safe, I'm just saying that there are far more pressing matters of safety than exceeding the speed limit. Of course, that is a complete opinion, since I do not have facts to back up my personal opinion.
Lemonchilli_X1 It puzzles me how that's legal in a country which is supposedly based on an "innocent until proven guilty" legal system.
When in court you are never asked "How do you plead, Guilty or Innocent?" You are asked "How do you plead, Guilty or Not Guilty?"
It is because you ARE presumed guilty! I had a friend that once told the judgey wudgey, "Innocent" Judgey Wudgey then said that he was entering the plea to "Not Guilty" My friend asked "Sir, are you making a judicial decision or practicing law from the bench?"...that cleared the court, and then my buddy read judgey wudgey the riot act and next thing you know we are two blocks away having lunch. It was really tense at the time but looking back you can see the logic of biting back. It is after all just a game of intimidation. He had much bigger balls that 20 of us put together and was really good about thinking quick on his feet.
