Speed cameras in NE IA

[Cyientist]

Were you speeding? If yes, stop B####### and pay the ticket.

Haha, a single sleepless 1 AM thread and it’s too much ******** for everyone

I’ll pay it as I likely made the mistake and was speeding. It bugs me that I can’t answer your first question based on the ticket I received in the mail though. It’s been nearly a month so I don’t remember how fast I was going.

 

[ClonesFTW]

Pay it - I've seen it show up as a judgement on the deed of someone's home.

 

[wxman1]

Yeah but was he only caught on camera?? What’s your sons wheelbase??

Seems little personal to be asking about my sons wheelbase perv

 

[ca4cy]

The scoundrels who put them up ought to be ashamed of themselves for being cowards. If a politician wants to raise money, they should be honest about it and just raise taxes. If it’s about safety (which it is not), then put an actual cop out there and write real tickets and engage in actual law enforcement. This is just a money grab by that jurisdiction.

Not sure about Iowa’s rule but I believe if you don’t pay it, it actually just gets reported to your credit and doesn’t go to warrant like a regular traffic ticket. I’m thinking if you’ve been driving for 25 years with nary a blemish to an otherwise perfect driving record, you likely are a fairly responsible guy who has a good job, owns a house and a nice car. Toss the ticket, take the credit hit, and go back to bed.

This is a bad idea. That will cost way more than the ticket in the long run.

 

[NorthCyd]

I don't like the speed cameras but they can be used for safety in certain situations. I would argue the ones like 235 that are clearly marked and everyone knows about do Influence behavior and may actually make a stretch of roadway safer. The unmarked mobile units that move location every day not so much. Those just seem like "gotcha" money grabs.

 

[Gorm]

This one has me mad enough to keep me up tonight. Came home and my wife let me know that I had a speeding ticket in the mail from going through West Union 27 days ago!!!

Don't pay it. In the state of Iowa they cannot report it to a credit agency, and you can tell anyone who calls you to go F themselves because they have zero legal footing to support them.

Almost all of these cameras are provided by service companies who own and operate them for the city / county. Their contract says the company will will get XX% of whatever ticket their equipment issues, even if the ticketed person DOESN'T PAY.

If everyone collectively stopped paying those tickets, the county / police will continue to have to pay the company their share of the tickets issued.

This concept isn't unprecedented.

 

[Urbandale2013]

I don't like the speed cameras but they can be used for safety in certain situations. I would argue the ones like 235 that are clearly marked and everyone knows about do Influence behavior and may actually make a stretch of roadway safer. The unmarked mobile units that move location every day not so much. Those just seem like "gotcha" money grabs.

The thing is they make it less safe in reality as far as I’m concerned. Everyone slows down for that little stretch but the. Speed back up again right afterwards. Often times people will go faster due to the feeling that they lost time having to slow down. It also causes a traffic jam, or at least it did pre-pandemic.

 

[Gorm]

This is a bad idea. That will cost way more than the ticket in the long run.

Why?

A governmental entity in the state of Iowa cannot report these types of tickets to a credit agency per the Iowa AG.

In fact, Cedar Rapids got caught trying to do their own thing with this and got called out on it:

4,800 traffic camera tickets with credit warning issued by ‘mistake’

CEDAR RAPIDS – Tactics used to collect on Cedar Rapids traffic camera tickets are again coming into question. A change …

www.thegazette.com

 

[CascadeClone]

Every year the Iowa senate puts up a bill trying to ban these things. This year I'd recommend putting some support behind this bill. I remember when they first came out, they actually said they were about safety.

While I admit they are 100% about revenue generation, they DID make the S-curve on 380 thru downtown CR much safer. I commuted thru there for ~20 years, still do some days. The number of fools roasting thru there at 75 or more, while others are merging on or off at 35... the speed cameras did bring that down by a lot - I noticed and felt safer. And I think they even had some YOY data showing a decrease in accidents.

 

[JimDogRock]

If you're going to fight it because you don't want the ticket on your record, make sure to request the calibration records of the device that cited you the ticket. Better yet, get a traffic attorney.

If it's just about the money, then pay it. To appear at a dispute it would be, what? 10 hours of your time and 400 miles of driving on your vehicle (with a chance of getting another speeding ticket )

If it's about the principle, F the man. These speed cameras and red light cameras enforcing traffic laws are a racket. The city of Chicago had plenty of sketchy behavior around their camera implementation. They'll always say it's about public safety until they get called out on doing things to increase revenue. Secretly lowering yellow light timings below their stated level of 3 seconds? No, that's not to ticket more people running reds. It was to prevent the most dangerous of crashes, obviously. Then why would they not fully disclose the shortening of the yellow time?

I thought that the whole 6th Amendment thing would have put the kibosh on camera enforcement long ago.
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him"
The cameras are only the tool, of course. So it's the company that installed, set up, calibrates, and maintains the tool that would be the witness I presume.

 

[NorthCyd]

The thing is they make it less safe in reality as far as I’m concerned. Everyone slows down for that little stretch but the. Speed back up again right afterwards. Often times people will go faster due to the feeling that they lost time having to slow down. It also causes a traffic jam, or at least it did pre-pandemic.

I don't think it causes those issues. I drive that stretch of road all the time. You have to be going 10 over to get a ticket which accommodates the general flow of traffic in that area. It pretty much only impacts those that are driving 15 over and weaving in and out if traffic.

 

[Gorm]

While I admit they are 100% about revenue generation, they DID make the S-curve on 380 thru downtown CR much safer. I commuted thru there for ~20 years, still do some days. The number of fools roasting thru there at 75 or more, while others are merging on or off at 35... the speed cameras did bring that down by a lot - I noticed and felt safer. And I think they even had some YOY data showing a decrease in accidents.

People still go 75 or more through there all the time. They just slow down within the 200 feet of those overhead gantrys, which causes a ripple effect down the interstate. I'd argue that is worse in terms of safety.

Plus the one camera northbound that sits like 100 feet in front of a Speed Limit increase sign. Even the Iowa DOT called out Cedar Rapids on that cash grab location.

 

[ISUAlum2002]

Just dropping in with a quick reminder to get a dash cam if you don't already have one. It won't help with the speeding tickets but for the other tickets talked about in this thread (running the stop sign, passing on double yellow) it may come in handy. They're pretty cheap nowadays and easy to install. Definitely cheaper than a $340 ticket for a stop sign violation.

If you can show you slowed down to a near stop, maybe not all wheels locked, it may help in either getting it dismissed or reduced. The passing on double yellow, if you can show the overall situation and that it may have actually been safer to get around that vehicle than continue being an obstacle/sitting duck on the road, it may help.

 

[dmclone]

I don't like the speed cameras but they can be used for safety in certain situations. I would argue the ones like 235 that are clearly marked and everyone knows about do Influence behavior and may actually make a stretch of roadway safer. The unmarked mobile units that move location every day not so much. Those just seem like "gotcha" money grabs.

Except the area on 235 where these are located was never a dangerous part of 235 and the number of accidents in this area have not changed and they've been in place for over a decade. I've heard that the ones in CR are actually on a dangerous part of the road, which at least provides a little more justification. Before the cameras, this area saw between 5-10 crashes a year, with it never going above 10. Since the cameras, it has ranged between 2-10 and the 2 was for one year. Oh and for that change, over 60k people received tickets in 2016.

 

[KnappShack]

These things are a money grab and our government at its worst

It isn't for safety. It's only to collect money from people going about their daily lives.

100% garbage. Oh...just drive the speed limit....ok. We want to take policing of our lives to that high of a degree? We want robocop in other parts of our daily lives?

Sell lotto tickets. Legalize gambling. Legalize weed. Make your money that way.

 

[jpete24]

Fight it on principal. If there is an intersection or a part of town that gets tons and tons of tickets, this isn't an issue with the public, but an issue with traffic control devices. They need to do a better job changing the flow of traffic entering small towns by actually changing how the road works as you come into town...but this costs money, god forbid we spend any money correctly designing the infrastructure.

 

[Gorm]

I thought that the whole 6th Amendment thing would have put the kibosh on camera enforcement long ago.
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him"
The cameras are only the tool, of course. So it's the company that installed, set up, calibrates, and maintains the tool that would be the witness I presume.

The state of Iowa has had a law on the books that law enforcement is not allowed to use photography to enforce traffic violations. This is why the ticket you receive has no court date on it. Its basically a glorified parking ticket.

This is also why most cities in Iowa let the early court challenges to the early red light cameras play out before implementing them. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled they do not violate Iowa law...because they are the legal equivelent of parking tickets. - It was after this ruling that you saw all the other cities jump onto this band wagon.

 

[nowncarolina]

I just got one in the mail from the interstate in Cedar Rapids. 70 in 55mph zone, $70 fine.. Good Lordl If you are ever in Charleston please do not drive 55 you will cause an accident. I read its a civil case so I am not going to pay it and no plans on ever spending another dime in Cedar Rapids

 

[NorthCyd]

Except the area on 235 where these are located was never a dangerous part of 235 and the number of accidents in this area have not changed and they've been in place for over a decade. I've heard that the ones in CR are actually on a dangerous part of the road. Before the cameras, this area saw between 5-10 crashes a year, with it never going above 10. Since the cameras, it has ranged between 2-10 and the 2 was for one year. Oh and for that change, over 60k people received tickets in 2016.

That might be. I haven't seen any data either way, and I would agree that if you really wanted to make a road safer you would need speed cameras along the whole stretch. That said, it's well marked and requires you to be going a significant amount over the speed limit, so it's a stupid tax on people who are clearly violating the law. I don't have a huge problem with that.

 

[Al_4_State]

The state of Iowa has had on the books for quite a while that law enforcement is not allowed to use photography to enforce traffic violations. This is why the ticket you receive has no court date on it. Its basically a glorified parking ticket.

Exactly. It's not a criminal charge. It's a civil citation, and therefore has a lower standard of proof (but also a lower consequence to you personally).

It's a blind, naked cash grab.