Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-20-2008, 03:38 PM
TangoKilo's Avatar
TangoKilo TangoKilo is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lethbridge
Posts: 1,308
Default

Those who complain the most about the cash cow, always seem to be the ones who feed it the most.
__________________
"I find it amazing that we, as a society, find it so easy to view the perpetrators of crime with an understanding and knowing that they are suffering from the frailties of being a human being yet we cannot seem to extend that same courtesy to the very people we ask to face, on a daily basis, the worst that mankind has to offer."
-Dave (Whiskey Wish)-
  #62  
Old 12-20-2008, 07:39 PM
Fox red lab's Avatar
Fox red lab Fox red lab is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 382
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win View Post
Ouch!


Oh that "buggar" must be such a horrible person for doing his job, eh? Too bad you set two court dates so they make double the over time, huh? Oh, and if you are found guilty they do normally apply the surcharge on top of the fine. And thank you for wasting my tax dollars. You are a frighteningly pleasant individual, and I hope you passed these great ethics onto your little ...children.



(cough) BS (cough). Sorry man, that would be like the an undercover officer having to wear a sign on his back saying "Undercover Officer". But hey, if you want to wipe before you poop, that is your business...






160(1) If a vehicle is involved in an offence referred to in section
157 or a bylaw, the owner of that vehicle is guilty of an offence.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the owner of the vehicle
satisfies the court that, at the time that the vehicle was involved in
an offence referred to in section 157 or a bylaw,
(a) in the case of a vehicle that was in motion,
(i) the owner of the vehicle was not driving the vehicle,
and
(ii) no other person was driving the vehicle with the
owner's expressed or implied consent,
and
(b) in the case of a vehicle that was parked,
(i) the owner did not park the vehicle, and
(ii) no other person parked the vehicle with the owner's
expressed or implied consent.
(3) An owner who is guilty of an offence under this section is not
liable to imprisonment in respect of that offence or in respect of a
default of a fine imposed in respect of that offence.



This was googled and is the current legislation in place in Alberta (the Traffic Safety Act). It basically says that the registered owner is responsibly for his vehicle at all times unless he can prove that it was being used by someone else at the time that did not have permission, and then that person will likely be receiving criminal charges.
I gotta agree with Rem338. What is the point of wasting the Sheriff's time. Why are people so against Law Enforcement? If you don't speed you won't get a ticket. Simple as that. And for those of you who speed and drive recklessly you guys are extremely inconsiderate and I just wonder what your parents must be like because they never taught you any courtesy or manners. My family are out on the roads and if you want to kill yourself then that is your business but your decisions on the road impact everyone. Think about it!
  #63  
Old 12-20-2008, 09:35 PM
Brian Brian is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 65
Default

I had just about the same thing happen to me. I was a few blocks back from the intersection of John Laurier Blvd. & Shaganappi Trail in Calgary when there was an announcement on the radio (they do that sometimes) warning people that there was radar at that intersection. I wasn't speeding, but slowed down well below the posted speed limit to be absolutely sure. As promised on the radio, there was a darkened van parked by the intersection & just as I went through a small red sports car whizzed by me on my left. The radar van was behind me on the right (pulled up on the grass beside John Luaurier Blvd. Sure enough......the flash went off & a bit later I got a ticket in the mail. I phoned and explained & was told mine was the only vehicle in the picture. I went to court and there was no way I could see the small sports car in the picture. I was completely hidden behind my truck. I was convicted and when I said I wouldn't pay the fine, I was told my alternative was to spend some time in jail. You can't believe how angry I was, but I ended up paying the fine. Missed work to go to court too. I'm still sore about it............10 years later. I've gotten over it (of course), but it does rub raw when I think about it.
  #64  
Old 12-20-2008, 11:48 PM
twofifty twofifty is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: S.E. British Columbia
Posts: 4,579
Default

Interesting story about the red car.

Anyone know how long is the delay between the radar unit cyphering a vehicle's speed, and the moment that the camera shutter takes the picture?

Lots can happen in a tenth of a second at 60mph: like 8.79 feet !
That's approx. half a vehicle's length, or enough for the red car to exit the picture before the image is captured, or to hide behind yours.

How to use that in court is another matter.
  #65  
Old 12-20-2008, 11:48 PM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Well I agree with most of you guys, 'if you don't speed, you don't get a ticket'. Of course there is a fluke occassion like the guy above and yes, that would burn a hole in your azz. A bad deal for sure and something that may only happen once in a life time...

Still I dislike photo radar, it's nothing but a cash cow, it urks me to see a van or truck along side the road with a cop behind the wheel drinking coffee and reading the newspaper while the camera does all the work. Radars, red light cameras, now a combination of both at intersections you got to wonder, whats next! If modern technology makes a traffic cops job any easier he may as well stay home and get payed for it.
  #66  
Old 12-21-2008, 08:46 AM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

So, what really bothers you Tuc is that someone might be getting paid for doing less "work" than you deem reasonable?

If everyone quit speeding then there would be no need for monitoring and enforcement and then all those lazy sob's would be out of a job. How about you preach that one Tuc.
  #67  
Old 12-21-2008, 02:08 PM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Hey bud, I'm not preaching, I have an opinion just like you or anyone else.

City workers see first hand the abuse of tax payers money and I don't agree with it.
You know what would help the economy work a little better? 'Governments' cutting back on waste, money used to bail out their corporate buddies and high end salaries starting at the top of the chain.

Radar cameras, red light cameras, etc, are nothing but a cash cows, a very easy method for cops to make their monthly quotas. Did you ever note when you see the majority of them set up? Would months end be a reasonable answer???

Quote:
If everyone quit speeding then there would be no need for monitoring and enforcement and then all those lazy sob's would be out of a job. How about you preach that one Tuc.
You must be a cop or closely related to one.

If everyone quit speeding our roads would be a safer place for all, (wishfull thinking, eh!) and all the lazy SOB (as you so mildly put it) could stop sitting behind a camera, reading the paper and filling their faces with Timmies coffee and donuts. Maybe they could get out there and help solve a gang related murder or two, God only knows we have enough of them here in Calgary.

Now let me ask you a question. Don't you think that would be tax dollars better spent (solving crime) then Mayor Bronco showing up on the CFCN evening news, with his poor mouth on, (as usual) telling the public we need more money to put cops on our streets to fight gang crime. At any given time he probably has a tenth of his force sitting out there behind a radar camera.

Taxes and utilities of course, will always go up 3 and 4% a year, (sometimes higher) no matter what amount of funding he receives from the province, feds or whoever. City hall will take their 6 and 7% increases, except for the Mayor, he'll take a 13% hike or better. OH, wait now, I wouldn't want you to run away thinking outside workers are over payed too. To set the record straight, over a 3 year contract we get 3%, 3% and 3.5 %, the poor grunts hardly keep up with inflation and the ever increasing cost of living.
I guess sh*t runs down hill eh, the average joe helps make the rich a little richer and the poor and little poorer.

Come on, lets get our priorieties straight, spending more money on radar and red light cameras (in my opinion) is not the way to go. We have too many of them in our city now.

BTW, don't come back here and say to me, look at the money they generate, that will only prove what I've been saying all along.....nothing but a cash cow.
  #68  
Old 12-21-2008, 02:39 PM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

There are many aspects of law that require enforcing. If traffic violations can be monitored and penalized for less outlay of public money by setting out red light cams and photo radar stations then good. It leaves more of the enforcement tax dollars to be directed to other areas of enforcement that are also in need. The very fact that these cameras generate revenue is proof enough that enforcement in that area of the law is necessary. If the folks who are ponying up the money for this revenue stream would simply look at where the problem lies (it certainly isn't that there is too much or too effective an enforcement tool) then you wouldn't have to worry about your tax dollars being spent on cameras anymore.

I am not a cop, not related to one, but I do take grave offense to your pejorative attitude to our enforcement officers who are trying to keep our streets safer for ordinary folk.

Last edited by Vindalbakken; 12-21-2008 at 03:07 PM.
  #69  
Old 12-21-2008, 05:28 PM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Quote:
I am not a cop, not related to one, but I do take grave offense to your pejorative attitude to our enforcement officers who are trying to keep our streets safer for ordinary folk.
Its not an attitude, it's a fact....

I do not go around belittling cops. I respect them and am damn glad we have them. The world would be an ugly place without police officers.

Do I have to believe in the photo radar system and the way they are run... No and I don't.
OMO
  #70  
Old 12-21-2008, 06:24 PM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc View Post
I do not go around belittling cops. I respect them
I am sure that folks will be lining up to get respect like this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc View Post
it urks me to see a van or truck along side the road with a cop behind the wheel drinking coffee and reading the newspaper while the camera does all the work. Radars, red light cameras, now a combination of both at intersections you got to wonder, whats next! If modern technology makes a traffic cops job any easier he may as well stay home and get payed for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc View Post
stop sitting behind a camera, reading the paper and filling their faces with Timmies coffee and donuts. Maybe they could get out there and help solve a gang related murder or two,
  #71  
Old 12-21-2008, 06:56 PM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Thats right, it's part of the deal, you run a photo radar from a truck or van and you get to read the paper and drink coffee. It's not the cops fault, it's the system.

Quote:
Do I have to believe in the photo radar system and the way they are run... No and I don't.
  #72  
Old 12-21-2008, 08:41 PM
Fox red lab's Avatar
Fox red lab Fox red lab is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 382
Default

I know a lot of people share TUC's view but for what it's worth I agree with Vindl's views.

It's true that gang related activity is a very serious problem in our city, but the chances of me dying in an automobile accident due to a reckless motorist are far greater than getting hurt by a gang member.

Every single day I see people driving extremely recklessley on Deerfoot Trail and I see people blowing red lights (not orange) downtown on 4th ave.

Speeding and red light tickets are a deterrent and I don't see them as a cash cow but a step in the right direction to saving lives.

The fact is people don't take driving seriously. Instead of getting in their vehicle and focussing on the safest possible way to get where they're going they are either on their cell phones or are busy thinking about something else.

I can't believe the absolute disrespect for human life on our streets. If I were to stand on my driveway with a loaded rifle and point it at every car that drove by I would probably get arrested in about 5 minutes, yet I can get in my car and drive 130 km/hr down Deerfoot and nobody see's that as a danger. Makes me wonder.

Thanks for reading my post and drive safely (for real, not pretend. The speed limit on Deerfoot is 100). OUR families lives depend on it.
  #73  
Old 12-21-2008, 08:41 PM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc
Thats right, it's part of the deal, you run a photo radar from a truck or van and you get to read the paper and drink coffee. It's not the cops fault, it's the system.
So you are advocating that we have unmanned photo radar. Is that the deal? Makes sense to me.
  #74  
Old 12-21-2008, 11:04 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default radar

TUC

you quoted "Radar cameras, red light cameras, etc, are nothing but a cash cows, a very easy method for cops to make their monthly quotas"

You seem confused with the reality of who is monitoring these multinova vehicles and the use of police resources. Police have absolutely nothing to do with multinova. They are NOT monitored or operated by police officers....never have...and never will. Ever contest a photo radar ticket? Who shows up in court....a civilian peace officer working for the respected city or jurisdiction.

Lets not start the agument of better time spent by the cops, and yes I am one. I'm not starting a flame war, but it is clear you have little actual fact of what my duties entail during a shift. So until you do, please keep the assumptions to a minimal.
  #75  
Old 12-22-2008, 03:13 AM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Well thanx for the enlightenment Cam.

So your telling me that the silver truck (I think its a Ford) I so often see sitting on Edmonton Trail (south of Mcknight) with a radar on the dash doesn't have a cop inside looking after it?
Hmm, could you tell me who that feller is thats reading the paper, drinking coffee and eating donuts. I'm almost positive I can see a badge pinned to his shirt. The next time I see him there I'll slow down and take a closer look.
Quote:
I'm not starting a flame war, but it is clear you have little actual fact of what my duties entail during a shift.
I think you are wrong Cam, I actually have a couple of friends who are police officers and they've told me some real horror stories. As a matter of fact I wouldn't want your job because of what you guys do have to deal with. I worked for City Parks for quite some time. I was stationed in the downtown core (I think that says it all) a couple of summers and I know all to well what goes on. Many times I had to call in the police, or Hazmat, or both, to help us deal with the homeless people, prostitutes, dead bodies, stabbings, muggings, bodily fluids, blood, needles, you know all those nice things that happen in our parks too.

Anyrate, whats your duties or my duties have to do with photo radars? I know our cops and EMS are the unsung heros. I don't deny that!

Oh, and I'm not making assumptions, I'm stating my opinion just like you have done. I know what I see in my travels throughout the city and a police officer sitting in a truck, with a photo radar on the dash, reading the paper, in my opinion is one example of a waste of tax payers money. I just think there are more important things for our police to do, like catching the bad guys. And its still my opinion, photo radar is nothing but a cash cow no matter where its located. As far as it being a deterrent not to speed, show me the facts and figures on that and I'll believe it.
The cameras are still flashing, drivers are getting tickets, so is it a deterrent or is it a cow? I think cops who personally catch a driver speeding is more of a deterrent not to speed because it adds demerits to your license and jacks up the price of his or her insurance for 3 years. Now thats a deterrent. Of course you can't read the paper, drink coffee and write tickets at the same time.

Your probably wondering, resentful driver? .... No, but I will tell. I have received 2 photo radars in my life. One was barely over the speed limit by 3 kms but I wrote out cheques for both of them. Cost you more to fight it...
With that said, I would rather take the money and give it to a homeless person on the street than pay it to the courts.

Last edited by Tuc; 12-22-2008 at 03:19 AM.
  #76  
Old 12-22-2008, 08:24 AM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

Which is it Tuc, do you want police to be investigating gang murders or do you want them to be on the streets writing speeding tickets. Which one would be better served by direct physical police presence. Because you already know there aren't enough resources to do both. If photo radar is not enough of a deterrent as it is then maybe the fines need to be higher. I think I already made this point - if you weren't driving your registered vehicle at the time you darn well should know who you should be collecting your money from.

And in case you didn't get the point - speeders are the bad guys. Perhaps they are not the EVIL bad guys, but they are lawbreakers and a danger to society.
  #77  
Old 12-22-2008, 10:29 AM
MrPuffyPants's Avatar
MrPuffyPants MrPuffyPants is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 35
Default I have the solution...

OK. Read through the responses to this one and I think that we are not well served by the flame war that is developing.

My bias is with the answers of BeansGunsGhandi.

When the politicians brought us Photo Radar over 10 years ago, I recall being promised that it would make our streets SAFER by drastically reducing speeding on our streets. I challenge anyone on this board to find me valid statistics to show that this has happened, and that it was somehow related to photo radar.

Because of that, I think it is our responsibility to get rid of it. Legal arguments are not going to get us there. The only thing that is going to change this now, is to make the system a net DRAW of money rather than a net ADD of money to the public coffers. If that were to happen, I am sure it would die awful fast. Especially when they cannot prove that after more than 10 years nothing has changed.

Here is how we do it, and it is so simple. All you have to do is exercise your rights!

Let me explain. I fought a ticket about 8 months ago in St. Albert. When I showed up for my court date, there was a roster of all the cases that were scheduled that afternoon posted in the main reception area. All appeared to be photo radar. I counted more than 14 sheets with over 40 names on each! I assume that they bunch all tickets on the same day every week, or every 2 weeks, but even so, that is a hell of a lot of people. I was the only one who chose to show up and fight.

When you do, the prosecutor tries to cut a deal with you before it all starts so that they do not have to waste time with you in court. If you refuse, and demand that they make their case, you just get to sit there for 20 mins while they call the guy who operated the gun up to the stand and go through all the questions like 'are you trained to use this gun' etc.
All in all you will waste about 20 minutes of 1)the operators time 2) the prosecutor's time, 3) the judge's time 4) the clerk's time not to mention all the staff that keep the place running etc.
If even half the people who get these stupid tickets paid some teenager to appear on their behalf and just sit there while the crown made it's case over and over again for every stupid ticket... the system would collapse. They rely on our apathy to keep feeding the cash cow.

Also, You need to ask the crown for full disclosure before the date. It is your right. That means that they must provide you with a copy of ALL the evidence that they are going to rely on at trial. This includes the original copies of the photos, the log file that the operator of the van fills out. copies of his training certificates etc. It also includes the search that was done at the registries to prove that this was your car (this costs the crown $15 to do). All the time and money that it would take them to provide this for everyone would make it not worth their while.

That is how we can get rid of this. All the actions that I have described are your legal right. All you have to do is say 'not guilty' and at the end of it you will have become better informed about the legal process (which I am sure we could all use...) and had a little bit of an adventure as well.
  #78  
Old 12-22-2008, 10:39 AM
MrPuffyPants's Avatar
MrPuffyPants MrPuffyPants is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 35
Default Interesting related article.....

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...r-enemies.html
  #79  
Old 12-22-2008, 11:24 AM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: WMU 303
Posts: 8,480
Default Solution = Anarchy

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPuffyPants;233205 All you have to do is say 'not guilty' and at the end of it you will have become better informed about the legal process (which I am sure we could all use...) and had a little bit of an adventure as well.[/quote
Where is the truth in that? When you say "not guilty", it's more than combining two words to form a sentence....It comes down to truth.

Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's (pay the fine).
  #80  
Old 12-22-2008, 11:50 AM
Tuc's Avatar
Tuc Tuc is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,591
Default

Quote:
Render onto Caesar what is Caesar's (pay the fine).
Pappy, a great cliche.
Here's some food for thought, do you think law enforcement officers, by-law officers, judges, or anyone else who is able to flash that badge pay photo radar tickets? Think about that one cause I know the answer and it came straight from the horses mouth.
Quote:
Which is it Tuc, do you want police to be investigating gang murders or do you want them to be on the streets writing speeding tickets.
No, I want them to be sitting in a van reading the paper, whatever. Come on, if they physically catch you, they've done their job and chances are the driver deserves the ticket. Wasn't that the way they did it in the ole days?

Van, your not getting my point. Radars are not deterrents they are cash cows and the officer sitting behind one in a parked truck or van is a waste of taxes and should have more important things to do.

Anyrate, as I said before, this is only my opinion and I am not going to comment anymore on it.

Merry Christmas to all!

Last edited by Tuc; 12-22-2008 at 12:02 PM.
  #81  
Old 12-22-2008, 12:03 PM
beansgunsghandi beansgunsghandi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canadian Rockies
Posts: 456
Default Not the same

Gotta rant a bit... I know that I'm going to lose when I go to fight my radar ticket. But I'm going anyhow because I think photo radar is wrong for many of the reasons outlined above. The easy path would be to pay my tax; I have the money. But the easy path is not the path that leads to change. I'm going to "waste" my time putting up a stink about it, waste time that is valuable to me (I could be outside for example...), and I'm gonna do it simply because I think photo radar is wrong.

Not one person on here has given a solid argument for why mobile photo radar is beneficial, useful, or justified. Most say, "Pay the ticket." No, that's wrong. You're a citizen, not a serf. If you let the government treat you like a serf then you deserve everything you get.

A lot of people on here are confusing speeding (generally bad) with mobile photo radar being "good" because they think it stops speeding... Mobile (and not that we're talking about MOBILE) photo radar does nothing but put revenue into the government's hands. It doesn't slow people down, it doesn't reduce accident rates, so why in the **ll are we putting up with it?

I am also very glad we have police officers--when you need 'em you really need 'em. Respect that. You can see from the views above that photo radar lowers the respect people have for officers, so that's another good reason to get rid of it right there. And the "officer" sitting in the truck isn't actually an officer that can do anything useful if needed, he's had a two-week training course and is now an officer in name only, at least in my area. So don't count on him for anything but clicking the camera button while swilling coffee and hoovering down donuts. That must be a real great job there buddy, maybe lower on the "useful" scale than even parking meter maid.

Rant off.
  #82  
Old 12-22-2008, 12:03 PM
Rackmastr Rackmastr is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,714
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc View Post
So your telling me that the silver truck (I think its a Ford) I so often see sitting on Edmonton Trail (south of Mcknight) with a radar on the dash doesn't have a cop inside looking after it?
Hmm, could you tell me who that feller is thats reading the paper, drinking coffee and eating donuts. I'm almost positive I can see a badge pinned to his shirt. The next time I see him there I'll slow down and take a closer look.
I think most municipalities are using the Corps of Commisionaires as their civilian peace officers who are operating the photo radar equiptment. I beleive they are peace officers under the TSA (Traffic Safety Act) but are not peace officers in terms of the Criminal Code. I dont know of many (if any) law enforcment agencies using police officers to man the radar vehicles.

As well, I dont think CPS is wearing their badge on the outside of their uniform as of now. They tried it in a test run for a while but I dont beleive you'll see a badge pinned to an officer's shirt performing regular duties.
  #83  
Old 12-22-2008, 12:15 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: WMU 303
Posts: 8,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuc View Post
Pappy, a great cliche.
Tuc. My post was for Mr. PuffyPants and the anarchists guide to photo radar lol. Have to make a correction though...It's a quote, not a cliche.
  #84  
Old 12-22-2008, 01:01 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default radar

Tuc

"So your telling me that the silver truck (I think its a Ford) I so often see sitting on Edmonton Trail (south of Mcknight) with a radar on the dash doesn't have a cop inside looking after it?
Hmm, could you tell me who that feller is thats reading the paper, drinking coffee and eating donuts. I'm almost positive I can see a badge pinned to his shirt. The next time I see him there I'll slow down and take a closer look"

I can assure you that #1 there is no badge pinned to his shirt. And #2 that isnt a cop. I encourage you however to stop and say hello to the nice person inside the vehicle and check for yourself...perhaps he will pour you a cup of coffee, pass you a donut, or share his paper with you

Is photo radar a cash cow? Possibly...maybe.... At the end of the day, do I care...not at all. I would much rather have civic revenue be generated by people doing something wrong...ie speeding, than say my property taxes going up instead. The bottom line is simple, and has been stated time and time again....dont speed, and u will not get a ticket. The radar vans are usually set to 11km over the posted speed limit before they take a picture. If you cant figure out that you are already going 10+ km over the speed limit, or observe the ever so obvious tinted out van parked on the side of deerfoot in the middle of the day or night you probably shouldnt even be behind the wheel of a moving vehicle. I'm sorry, I, and most people probably wont have any sympathy when the ticket comes in your mail a few weeks later.

That being said, by all means go to court. Every single ticket I write someone, I encourage the person to go to court if they feel they have a defence. I'm not saying they are guilty of that offence, I'm simply giving them a ticket as I believe (in my training as a p.o.) that they have done something wrong contrary to a certain act. I'm in no way the finder of guilt, that is the purpose of the judicial system...not me. And dont get me started on the judicail system (sigh)

"Here's some food for thought, do you think law enforcement officers, by-law officers, judges, or anyone else who is able to flash that badge pay photo radar tickets? Think about that one cause I know the answer and it came straight from the horses mouth."

Of couse we dont pay them. Joe Blow who is operating the photo radar van knows all of us cops/judges/by-law guys/and badge flashers personally and the vehicle's that we drive. So he never takes photos of our vehicles (he's good that way). If it does happen to take a photo, the license plate is computer cross checked against the 2 million registered vehicles in Alberta and if found out to be someone that is obviously above the law, the ticket gets cancelled immediately. (Sigh!!)

Yes, we pay photo radar tickets too. Period.
  #85  
Old 12-22-2008, 02:17 PM
MrPuffyPants's Avatar
MrPuffyPants MrPuffyPants is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 35
Default

BeansGunsGhandi - Good for you. Though you may not get much support on this forum for your stance, I agree with your thoughts and principles.

ehntr - Not everything is as black and white as you would have us believe. You see pleading not guilty as a lie. As for myself, (given that there is no 'prove it' plea), I see it as an exercise of my right to have the crown disclose for me and the public all evidence against me prior to being given a punishment for a crime that up till that point they have not even had to prove.

I am sure that you would agree this is important in any fair legal system.

If we allow our justice system to say to us... 'You know you are guilty, I do not have to prove it; shut up and pay the fine' that is not a system that I am prepared to support.
  #86  
Old 12-22-2008, 02:48 PM
beansgunsghandi beansgunsghandi is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canadian Rockies
Posts: 456
Default

Camshaft writes, "The bottom line is simple, and has been stated time and time again....dont speed, and u will not get a ticket."

I and others do have a massive issue with getting a ticket when we weren't the ones speeding. I wasn't speeding, and I got a ticket. The above statement is wrong. Or, from the crown's perspective, my vehicle got a ticket. In Europe if you get a ticket driving a vehicle they send you a picture of the person behind the wheel. I've paid those tickets without even thinking about it. This is different.
  #87  
Old 12-22-2008, 02:54 PM
Vindalbakken Vindalbakken is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,790
Default

Do you question the accuracy of the technology PuffyPants? Therein lies your only defence. The crown has already put forth their case that the technology is sound. They have provided the burden of proof. So now it is up to you to refute their claim.

Or is your argument that the registered owner of a vehicle does not assume any responsibility for that vehicle? Is your not guilty plea not a lie because you actually were not driving the vehicle at the time? Would it be different if your vehicle were the getaway car for a bank robbery? Do you still bear no responsibility for the vehicle?
  #88  
Old 12-22-2008, 03:22 PM
camshaft camshaft is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 689
Default radar

beansgunsghandi

"I know that I'm going to lose when I go to fight my radar ticket. But I'm going anyhow because I think photo radar is wrong for many of the reasons outlined above. The easy path would be to pay my tax; I have the money. But the easy path is not the path that leads to change. I'm going to "waste" my time putting up a stink about it, waste time that is valuable to me (I could be outside for example...), and I'm gonna do it simply because I think photo radar is wrong."

"I wasn't speeding, and I got a ticket."

So, are u going to court because you actually have a defense to the charge, or, as it appears, are you wasting your own time and the courts to educate the judge on how your civil liberties and rights as a vehicle owner in this country have been violated because you have no defense? Sorry to bust your bubble in advance, but the judge doesnt care about your opinion on whether photo radar is right or wrong. I'm not trying to be ignorant, but that is simply reality.

I'v stated before, and this thread is becoming off topic and redundant....go to court and plead NOT GUILTY. It is your constitutional given right. Get full disclosure and state your case. If you get acquited, I tip my hat to you. I only hope you arrive in court a little more prepared.
  #89  
Old 12-22-2008, 03:38 PM
MrPuffyPants's Avatar
MrPuffyPants MrPuffyPants is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 35
Default

Vindalbakkan - At no point during my previous posts did I question the accuracy of the technology employed. Though that would be my right. I am sorry that you believe that this is "my only defense" but I disagree. Even if it were, I have the right to question it openly in court.
Unlike many, I believe that it is my responsibility to ensure that the governing system to which I belong and pay tax lives up to it's obligations. When the system begins to get bloated and starts to demand payment for infractions simply because a new technology allows them to do something that they could not do before, even after it has been proven not to be effective; it is my prerogative to push back. In a non violent way of course.
  #90  
Old 12-22-2008, 03:39 PM
JohninAB's Avatar
JohninAB JohninAB is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Central Alberta
Posts: 6,668
Default

Solution is simple, don't speed, don't pay. As for some other comments on here, people should get the facts straight before making statements and generalizations.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.