| Author | Post |
|---|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 08:35 pm |
|
romegasir wrote: more like primordial ooze 
I got your ooze 
|
roman2000
Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 18th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 113 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 09:43 pm |
|
I'd be happy if they could put red light cameras in at every busy intersection in Rome. There are some dangerous drivers in this town. They speed through red lights and if cameras will make them stop and think, I'm all for it. My only concern is the danger in people slamming on their brakes. Hopefully they'll continue adding cameras to the dangerous intersections. As soon as enough money is made from the Martha Berry intersection to purchase and install cameras for another intersection, they could do that...and so on.
|
romegasir
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 2345 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 10:13 pm |
|
| i think you should HAVE to be caught by a real police officer...............................who has a 16 week certification course in red light enforcement............................AND the officer must capture you running the redlight on his dashmounted video system in addition to a beta max recorder that he holds on his shoulder and drives around (just to combat all that video tampering that the po-po are famous for).....................................................AND the violator must ADMIT that they run the redlight.............................AND there must be a video taken by a non-interested, neutral, detached party who has also completed the 16 week red light enforcement class...................otherwise, it should be automatic, Not Guilty
|
coolhead64
Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 516 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 11:57 pm |
|
The_WaTchR wrote: I see that they are rushing to get them in by the 1st of July so as to avoid the new law going into effect that says that you have to prove the cameras are needed.
They still have to prove it by Jan. 1st 2010, do studies to make sure that engineering alternatives would be better, and the State DOT has the final say on all cameras and can withdraw the approval for them at any time.
|
Commission Watcher
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 23rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 447 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 12:43 pm |
|
romegasir wrote: i think you should HAVE to be caught by a real police officer...............................who has a 16 week certification course in red light enforcement............................AND the officer must capture you running the redlight on his dashmounted video system in addition to a beta max recorder that he holds on his shoulder and drives around (just to combat all that video tampering that the po-po are famous for).....................................................AND the violator must ADMIT that they run the redlight.............................AND there must be a video taken by a non-interested, neutral, detached party who has also completed the 16 week red light enforcement class...................otherwise, it should be automatic, Not Guilty
You forgot the requirement that the video taken by a non-interested, neutral, detached party has to be clearly filmed on a cell phone camera.
-CW
BTW Liber8r: I have heard(on this forum before) the form is on the back of the ticket. Sign it and mail it back instead of the check.
|
msla
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 11th, 2007 |
| Location: | Shannon, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 03:23 pm |
|
Additionally,
I think still another non-interested party should have to be filming all parties involved including those filming to prove it might have happened before it could even be considered to have existed and then entered in court.
|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 11:50 pm |
|
| All of you can just bite me....bite me I say LOL
|
stoker
Member
| Joined: | Sat Nov 10th, 2007 |
| Location: | Lindale, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 1755 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 12:11 am |
|
| The other alternative would be to obey the traffic laws. Nah, sorry I suggested that. Probably never work.
|
FRL88
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | Tin Pan Alley, USA |
| Posts: | 1912 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 12:16 am |
|
liber8r wrote:
Red light cameras bypass due process, which is unconstitutional. Think about this:
Let's say it's the family car, or your kid takes the car, or for whatever reason, whoever the car is registered to isn't the one driving. Flash goes the camera, who does the ticket get mailed to? Voila, guilty until proven innocent. That is un-American. Just sayin'.
There are several other reasons I hate those cameras. They don't "work" like many people think they do. They actually make intersections more dangerous. Just speaking from the statistics I've read and my experience as a motorcyclist. Just sayin'.
simple fix ....two birds with one stone.....register your car in your mother in laws name...run all the lights you want too. LOL (satire)
|
stoker
Member
| Joined: | Sat Nov 10th, 2007 |
| Location: | Lindale, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 1755 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 12:17 am |
|
FRL88 wrote: liber8r wrote:
Red light cameras bypass due process, which is unconstitutional. Think about this:
Let's say it's the family car, or your kid takes the car, or for whatever reason, whoever the car is registered to isn't the one driving. Flash goes the camera, who does the ticket get mailed to? Voila, guilty until proven innocent. That is un-American. Just sayin'.
There are several other reasons I hate those cameras. They don't "work" like many people think they do. They actually make intersections more dangerous. Just speaking from the statistics I've read and my experience as a motorcyclist. Just sayin'.
simple fix ....two birds with one stone.....register your car in your mother in laws name...run all the lights you want too. LOL (satire) Satire? That's a great idea
|
HollyRayburn
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 10th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome, Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 204 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:23 am |
|
FRL88 wrote: liber8r wrote:
Red light cameras bypass due process, which is unconstitutional. Think about this:
Let's say it's the family car, or your kid takes the car, or for whatever reason, whoever the car is registered to isn't the one driving. Flash goes the camera, who does the ticket get mailed to? Voila, guilty until proven innocent. That is un-American. Just sayin'.
There are several other reasons I hate those cameras. They don't "work" like many people think they do. They actually make intersections more dangerous. Just speaking from the statistics I've read and my experience as a motorcyclist. Just sayin'.
simple fix ....two birds with one stone.....register your car in your mother in laws name...run all the lights you want too. LOL (satire)
only a batface would say something like that! lol
|
FRL88
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | Tin Pan Alley, USA |
| Posts: | 1912 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:38 am |
|
| Actually I registered mine in Holly Rayburns name....so redlights with cameras are priority targets.
|
SassyGirl
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 11th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome |
| Posts: | 334 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 02:30 am |
|
| Mine is registered in Frick's name.....wait....that might not be such a good idea. They would know it was fake then. Thank you folks! I'll be here all week! Last edited on Tue Jun 24th, 2008 02:48 am by SassyGirl
|
SassyGirl
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 11th, 2007 |
| Location: | Rome |
| Posts: | 334 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:47 pm |
|
Here is an interesting article that I read in Newsweek yesterday. Luckily, I was able to find it on their website so that I could post it here. It is an article about radar detectors that have GPS built in and they notify the driver when they are approaching a photo-enforced intersection.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/142634
|
BillT962
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 06:16 pm |
|
SassyGirl wrote: Here is an interesting article that I read in Newsweek yesterday. Luckily, I was able to find it on their website so that I could post it here. It is an article about radar detectors that have GPS built in and they notify the driver when they are approaching a photo-enforced intersection.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/142634
about time they finally installed something on a radar detector that may actually do some good LOL
|
Current time is 05:08 am | Page:   1 2 3 4   |
|
