Speed camera

[VeloClone]

They're a choke point a person stopped at a light is going 0 and the person going 73 is still going 73 and catching up to speeder

But that is assuming that the guy going 73 isn't going to experience the same thing when he gets there. The guy who was stopped (or maybe even got lucky and arrived at a green light) is long gone before the guy going 73 has to face the same lights with the same timing. It might be marginally better for the guy going 73, it might be marginally better for the guy speeding or it might be a total wash. They both have to face the lights with the same phase timing regardless of how fast they were previously going and when they encounter the light.

We have all encountered situations where someone sped past us and we catch them at the light. We have also all encountered situations where someone sped past us and just made a light that we ended up having to stop for. Same thing here.

 

[Gorm]

What if they had radar detectors and cameras at those same spots, but had officers positioned to enforce them down the road rather than a 3rd party mailing tickets? Would that be more tolerable for people?

Iowa has some very tricky laws on "automated enforcement" of traffic laws via law enforcement. This is why all the red light tickets and automated speeding tickets have all the legal authority of a parking ticket in this state.
In fact, if I remember correctly, one of the first red light cameras in this state was challenged under those laws and that is when the Iowa Supreme Court determined that the tickets do not violate the law because they are being handed out by county and city municipalities, and not by law enforcement.

I tried searching for some articles about this court challenge, but it happened 15+ years ago now and the search results are nothing but current day articles.

 

[Clonehomer]

Iowa has some very tricky laws on "automated enforcement" of traffic laws via law enforcement. This is why all the red light tickets and automated speeding tickets have all the legal authority of a parking ticket in this state.
In fact, if I remember correctly, one of the first red light cameras in this state was challenged under those laws and that is when the Iowa Supreme Court determined that the tickets do not violate the law because they are being handed out by county and city municipalities, and not by law enforcement.

I tried searching for some articles about this court challenge, but it happened 15+ years ago now and the search results are nothing but current day articles.

So…update the laws to eliminate 3rd party issuers and force the immediate enforcement. If, of course, this is about safety.

 

[somecyguy]

Iowa has some very tricky laws on "automated enforcement" of traffic laws via law enforcement. This is why all the red light tickets and automated speeding tickets have all the legal authority of a parking ticket in this state.
In fact, if I remember correctly, one of the first red light cameras in this state was challenged under those laws and that is when the Iowa Supreme Court determined that the tickets do not violate the law because they are being handed out by county and city municipalities, and not by law enforcement.

I tried searching for some articles about this court challenge, but it happened 15+ years ago now and the search results are nothing but current day articles.

It's civil, not criminal. So it can't be reported to the DMV or any other govt entity. In Iowa, the debt also cannot be reported to your credit report, so it can go to collections, but they have no method other than harassment to get people to pay.

 

[dmclone]

It's civil, not criminal. So it can't be reported to the DMV or any other govt entity. In Iowa, the debt also cannot be reported to your credit report, so it can go to collections, but they have no method other than harassment to get people to pay.

Can they do anything?

 

[alarson]

Can they do anything?

Believe they can take it out of your iowa tax refund.

Anyone from out of state can probably ignore them though.

 

[keepngoal]

It's wild how upset speeders get for receiving the equivalent of a parking ticket for driving 11 and over the posted speed limit. Do these speeders also yell to the clouds about parking tickets found on their windshield? Not rhetorical.

 

[2speedy1]

Believe they can take it out of your iowa tax refund.

Anyone from out of state can probably ignore them though.

Ive had people tell me they got collections notices when they didnt pay them, so a hit against your credit possibly.

 

[2speedy1]

It's wild how upset speeders get for receiving the equivalent of a parking ticket for driving 11 and over the posted speed limit. Do these speeders also yell to the clouds about parking tickets found on their windshield? Not rhetorical.

Its similar to touching a hot stove and saying "ouch that hurt" then proceeding to touch it again and again, expecting a different result.

 

[ISUTex]

Now they can have a police officer write tickets based on how they feel that day rather than an objective standard that the cameras had. If I were these towns, I’d have officers write tickets at 5 over the limit to make a point.

If that happens I hope they pull you over.

 

[Clonehomer]

If that happens I hope they pull you over.

Only if my speedometer is off 5 mph.

 

[alarson]

It's wild how upset speeders get for receiving the equivalent of a parking ticket for driving 11 and over the posted speed limit. Do these speeders also yell to the clouds about parking tickets found on their windshield? Not rhetorical.

I tend to take a more mixed view.

I've never gotten a ticket from one of these speed cameras, for the record.

I actually don't mind the one on 235 all that much these days as its highly visible, no ticket until 10 over, and it prevents the traffic jams that can be caused by police enforcement on the highway there. One could argue, however, that the speed limit should be higher in the first place. 55 is too low through most of the city of DSM (and similar for 60mph where that's in place) and almost no one is going below those speeds.

I also don't mind the other locations as long as there is posted signage (the point of speed enforcement shouldn't be to "catch" people but to create a visible effect to lower speeds, which is why officers shouldnt be 'hiding' either)

But revenue generation like this creates an incentive for municipalities to avoid other alternatives that may actually make a roadway more safe (if safety is actually a concern) as we know that regardless of the posted limit people tend to drive a relatively 'comfortable' speed. Sometimes this would mean roadway design changes. Other times this would mean raising the speed limit to one that makes more sense.

 

[FallOf81]

Just passed by the unit that started this thread. It's still standing.

 

[Gorm]

Ive had people tell me they got collections notices when they didnt pay them, so a hit against your credit possibly.

Your credit cannot be impacted by unpaid automated tickets in this state. If they did report it to your credit, it would be a documented violation of the law. That would be a bold strategy for the collection agencies.

Now, there is nothing stopping the collection agencies from calling and hounding you about it. I guess its just a matter of how many times they want their agents to hear the phrase "Go F*ck yourself" before getting hung up on.

It does sound like the city could take you to court to pay it. - But spending what could be thousands of dollars to recover a less than $100 dollar ticket means that is likely an idle threat unless your ticket is above a particular threshold.

What we really need is a ground roots effort for every Iowan to stop paying the tickets. All of these contracts for these cameras include roughly a 30%-40% commission to the camera companies for every ticket issued. Per the contract, these companies get this money REGARDLESS if the city / county is paid by the violater. When everyone stops paying, then suddenly the cameras become money pits for that city / county. But hey, if they really are for "safety" purposes, then the city / county should have no problems with continuing to dump their limited resources into them with nothing in return...right? RIGHT?

 

[Gorm]

It would also be awesome if the Iowa legislature would pass a law saying that a city / county needs to 100% outright own and operate the equipment for these automated violations and prevent them from sharing revenue obtained via the devices with third parties.

Since the technology for these cameras is owned / patented / operated by third parties, the result of such a law would effectively end them as soon as it was implemented.

 

[qwerty]

Tell her to stop letting her boyfriend drive the car.

Well, that frees her up for other activities . . . .

 

[cedarstrip]

Your credit cannot be impacted by unpaid automated tickets in this state. If they did report it to your credit, it would be a documented violation of the law. That would be a bold strategy for the collection agencies.

Now, there is nothing stopping the collection agencies from calling and hounding you about it. I guess its just a matter of how many times they want their agents to hear the phrase "Go F*ck yourself" before getting hung up on.

It does sound like the city could take you to court to pay it. - But spending what could be thousands of dollars to recover a less than $100 dollar ticket means that is likely an idle threat unless your ticket is above a particular threshold.

What we really need is a ground roots effort for every Iowan to stop paying the tickets. All of these contracts for these cameras include roughly a 30%-40% commission to the camera companies for every ticket issued. Per the contract, these companies get this money REGARDLESS if the city / county is paid by the violater. When everyone stops paying, then suddenly the cameras become money pits for that city / county. But hey, if they really are for "safety" purposes, then the city / county should have no problems with continuing to dump their limited resources into them with nothing in return...right? RIGHT?

I said this earlier in the thread. I'm fine with speed cameras if the entire fine goes to something like the VA or DNR trust fund and the municipality running the cameras bears the entire cost of operating them.

 

[Clonehomer]

I said this earlier in the thread. I'm fine with speed cameras if the entire fine goes to something like the VA or DNR trust fund and the municipality running the cameras bears the entire cost of operating them.

I don’t understand this. Why does it matter where the money goes? They’re not randomly picking people to send a bill to. If you don’t want to contribute to the local community, follow the law.

 

[cycloner29]

If that happens I hope they pull you over.

 

[NWICY]

My wife has been tagged by the one here (the 42nd St. bridge) probably ten times...

View attachment 135391

I've shown her where the cameras are. You know where they are. I've shown you how to program the cruise control on your Tucson to 65/60. Don't go up to 70 and you should be okay but...

Sigh.

Wives are amazing sometimes.

Hey it's the modern era she can spend her disposable income however she wants.