If you want to challenge the speed limit on a particular stretch of road, be my guest. Take it to your city councilpeople and get a local law passed to change the rule. Until that new regulation is put in place, your responsibility (as a law abiding citizen) is to follow the current law.

Jazzabelle, I don’t dismiss the possibility of broken equipment but I don’t automatically assume the local DPW commissioner is scheming to take my money when I have not been doing something wrong. I have been “hit” with a few fines due to broken parking meters. If the problem is not intermittent, a lot of people will be affected by it and somebody will challenge it and the system will get repaired. The same thing has happened with live police officers who (in and effort to make their “ticket quota”) give tickets to drivers who they normally wouldn’t bother with. I would rather challenge the machine than get into a “he said / she said” fight with a police officer.

Michael, the equipment wasn’t broken. It was incorrectly programmed. You can assume whatever you want about whether that was intentional or not. The point is, the technology contributes to a feeling of living in a police state. It doesn’t do anything for government-citizen relations when governments react to economic downturns by putting further screws on citizens who are already feeling the pain. For that matter, traffic laws (and the fines that come along with them) are matters of contract between the individual and the state; they aren’t even laws that people are obligated to obey absent a driver’s license. When enough people figure that out, the states will have a hard time raising any revenue at all.

Jazzabelle, I think “incorrectly programmed” counts as “broken” or “not functioning properly”. Would you feel better being stopped by a live police officer, rather than getting a ticket in the mail? I don’t see enforcing the law as “putting the screws” on citizens.
As for traffic laws not being “laws that people are obligated to obey” – where in the world did you pick that idea up? Try making that case before a judge and let us know how it turns out, please.

Michael,

I got that idea by actually reading the statutes in my state, something that you have clearly never done, because I understand the laws are basically the same in every state.

In order to get a driver’s license, you have to sign a contract agreeing that you will obey the statutes governing the use of the road and your vehicle. That would be unnecessary if the statutes were enforceable against everyone, whether they signed the contract or not. But the statutes clearly state that a driver’s license is required for anyone who wants to drive … and “drive” is defined as the operation of a registered motor vehicle for purposes of commerce. So, if you’re just going to the grocery store or to pick up the kids from school, you’re not “driving” (according to the state legislature) and you don’t need a license.

Why don’t you read YOUR state statutes and see what they say?

I’ve never been ticketed for driving without a license, but I know one woman who was, and the judge agreed with her and threw out the ticket.

Well, I applaud your diligence in reading the statute. The license application in my state has no such “contract”. Even if it did have such language, it would not bind the out of state (or visitors from other countries) drivers to follow the traffic laws. The laws regarding traffic apply to everyone, licensed in the state or otherwise. If you don’t stop for a red light, speed or otherwise violate the statute you can be ticketed, either by an on-site police officer or remotely through the use of a traffic camera.
The next time you get issued a ticket for a traffic violation let us know how the judge responds to your “contract” story.

Michael,

The license application IS the contract. It had conditions on it, and you signed the bottom of it, didn’t you? Anything you sign is a contract, otherwise they wouldn’t need your signature. And yes, a license in one state is a binding contract in other states, due to reciprocal agreements between the states.

You may be correct that someone who runs a red light “can be” ticketed, in the sense that any time I leave my house, I “can be” struck by a car and killed. Doesn’t make it legal. That’s why the judge sided with my acquaintance who raised the proper legal argument against her ticket, and threw it out. You might not know this, but the vast majority of “laws” that people have to obey today are actually contractual obligations and not laws. Laws apply to everyone; statutes apply conditionally. Either the conditions will be in the statute, or they will be rooted in a contract. Eliminate the contract and you eliminate the obligation.

You clearly aren’t satisfied knowing that it worked in a courtroom somewhere, so the solution is to read your own state’s statute and quit pretending that you would accept my personal testimony in the matter as more believable than the testimony of my acquaintance who actually has a “success” story. Actually, that’s a good thing; you don’t know the details of her case, just as you wouldn’t know the details of mine. You shouldn’t take anyone’s word on the matter. Study it out for yourself. It’s not that hard to do.

Point taken (about taking your word regarding your or your friend’s legal experience.)
Good luck in your further legal studies.