I-95, driving through SC: controversial speed camera

[gk90]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110327/ap_on_re_us/us_speed_camera_spat

"RIDGELAND, S.C. – As Interstate 95 sweeps past this small town along South Carolina's coastal plain, motorists encounter cameras that catch speeding cars, the only such devices on the open interstate for almost 2,000 miles from Canada to Miami.
The cameras have nabbed thousands of motorists, won accolades from highway safety advocates, attracted heated opposition from state lawmakers and sparked a federal court challenge.
Ridgeland Mayor Gary Hodges said the cameras in his town about 20 miles north of the Georgia line do what they are designed to do: slow people down, reduce accidents and, most importantly, save lives.
But lawmakers who want to unplug them argue the system is just a money-maker and amounts to unconstitutional selective law enforcement."

 

[WDWisTheBest]

Good information. I hope the SC legislators are able to stop this practice.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Not sure about the "constitutional" bit--the other argument might be you have a constitutional right to speed.

Is the camera "zone" marked? And how flexible are they? Is it one MPH above the limit--5--10???

And it's both--slows folks down from the usual 80-90 they do, and of course it is a big $$$ maker.

 

[Brian Noble]

I'm not sure how I have a constitutional right not to be caught speeding, myself...

 

[Lewisc]

South Carolina has a law which prohibits issuing a ticket solely based on photo evidence. Municipalites are trying to "work around" the law by having a cop positioned at the place where the photo radar operates. Allegedly the cop serves as the other evidence. It's bogus to claim the tickets are being issued on any basis other then photo radar.

There is also a law which requires personal delivery of a ticket within one hour of the infraction.

One place isn't calling them speeding tickets but rather a violation of a town ordinance as a way around the laws.

A private company is supplying the photo radar, and paying for the cops salary, in exchange for half the revenue.

The question isn't if you have a constitutional right to speed. The question is if a town has to follow state law.

I think state highway patrols and not local communities should be issuing speeding tickets on interstates.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Buford T. Justice: Breaker, breaker for the Bandit.
Bandit: Come on back, breaker.
Buford T. Justice: You got trouble comin'. Big trouble.
Bandit: Well, what's your handle son and what's your 20?
Buford T. Justice: My handle is Smokey Bear and I'm tail grabbin' your @$$ right now!

At least cameras don't profile.

 

[Danibelle]

SC can issue a speeding ticket if you are more than 5 miles over the limit. Yes, the camera is there and cars are being stopped. Beware!

 

[NickTim&Sami'smom]

Last October we drove to Florida from Mass. about 2 weeks after we got home we recieved a speeding ($40) ticket from the Maryland police. We paid it, they had pictures of our plates and our van. My husband was over the limit...his fault and he should have been paying more attention to the speed limit. I think he was doing 65 in a 40?.

 

[OKWMom]

According to the information posted here in the SC newspapers, tickets are being mailed if the camera catches the driver going 80 or above in that section of I-95. It is in Ridgeland and there is supposed to be a sign indicating that there is an electronic monitoring.

I also read in the paper a couple of months ago that the camera takes a picture of the car/driver and the plates. According to the information in the article, an officer then compares the photograph of the driver taken by the camera to the photo identification for the registered driver. If a positive ID is made, the ticket is mailed to the address on record. If the photo doesn't match, a ticket is not supposed to be issued.

This is supposed to mean that if the driver isn't the registered owner, they can't be ticketed since there wasn't a positive ID made. Meaning that a husband shouldn't get a ticket if he was driving a car registered to his wife.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Danibelle: 5 MPH over the limit is a bit strict, I think...would be hard to even notice w/o radar or a camera.

OKWMom:
If the speed limit there is 70, then folks doing 80 and above probably should get a ticket. And I'll bet "and above" is near 90 MPH in many cases.

 

[OKWMom]

OKWMom:
If the speed limit there is 70, then folks doing 80 and above probably should get a ticket. And I'll bet "and above" is near 90 MPH in many cases.

According to the newspapers, it is over 90 in many of the cases and IIRC, the speed limit is 70 on that stretch. That is why even though many of the SC lawmakers are trying to get this town to stop using the camera, AAA is fighting FOR it.

 

[rock_doctor]

We saw several (3 or 4) speed traps in south SC into Ga. The cameras were portable mounted on tripods. It is a huge cash cow for them and that is all they care about. I won't post how i feel about them taking advantage of travelers who can't come back to fight a ticket. I hope they realize doing this will puts a bad taste in the travelers mouth and they are less likely to spend money in that state.

 

[WDWisTheBest]

And where is the ticket money going? According to Mayor Gary Hodges of Ridgeland, “Of the $133 citation a driver can be issued for traveling 10 to 15 mph over the speed limit, Ridgeland will remit about $84 to the state and keep the remaining $49 ... The $49 will be divided evenly between the town and iTraffic.”

iTraffic, which makes cameras, is a for-profit firm run by a man named William Danzell, who established iTraffic after the bankruptcy of his previous photo enforcement enterprise, Nestor Traffic Systems. According to a journal on the politics of driving called The NewsPaper, “The new venture looks to target the estimated 1,000 vehicles that pass through the town’s 70-mph zone at 81 mph or more each day — enough to generate $40 million.”

Ridgeland, South Carolina is a place to avoid.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Or--just slow down below 80 MPH.

 

[paults]

slow down people , LIFE'S too short to make it shorter

 

[Lewisc]

At least cameras don't profile.

The profiling is done by the employee that matches DMV pictures, or descriptions, against the photo of the driver taken by the camera.

I have no idea if profiling is being done but it's certainly possible both pictures being of an African-American is enough for the employee to decide the photos are "close enough" to issue a ticket.

Giving a "real ticket" may motivate the driver to slow down for the rest of his trip. The photo ticket does no such thing.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Profiling isn't even an issue here.
It's speeding MORE THAN 10 MPH above the limit. And no matter who is using the cameras, folks doing that (and usually a lot more) probably ought to get a ticket.

 

[Lewisc]

Suppose the employee IS an African American????

And anyway, profiling isn't even an issue here. It's speeding MORE THAN 10 MPH above the limit. And no matter who is using the cameras, folks doing that (and usually a lot more) probably ought to get a ticket.

and the African American employee could decide anyone who is white is close enough. Giving a ticket based on comparing an old drivers license photo or description against a photo taken while the car is going 80 MPH doesn't sound very accurate.

I agree they ought to get a ticket. They should be pulled over and given a ticket. That will deter that person from speeding,at least for the rest of his trip. Mailing him a ticket doesn't do that.

My biggest objection is the fact that local towns are ignoring SC laws. It's not legal to issue a ticket solely based on photo radar but that's exactly what's being done.

 

[Robert P]

Not sure about the "constitutional" bit--the other argument might be you have a constitutional right to speed.

Is the camera "zone" marked? And how flexible are they? Is it one MPH above the limit--5--10???

And it's both--slows folks down from the usual 80-90 they do, and of course it is a big $$$ maker.

Last Fall, there was no marking, signs, or warnings in advance. You just came upon a plain van, sitting under a bridge, with several tripods set up. The focus seemed to be Southbound traffic. The article said above 80 (10 mph over). I had the cruise set on 78 I recall, and had no problem.

 

[BillSears]

I'll make sure I have my radar detector on. It'll pick this up before I get close to it.