hddude

I would love to hear someone explain the legality under CA law of parks in LA County issuing moving traffic violations that only require the same evidence as an ordinary parking ticket. My wife and I as tourists visiting from AZ got one of these $125 "tickets" in the mail. Via the Web, I was able to view a video of a car rolling through a stop sign in a LA County park parking lot. Yes, in the parking lot, which appeared to be empty on a workday. It could have been our rental car -- I honestly don't know -- but the video makes no effort to take a picture of the driver. That's right, a moving traffic violation assigned to the owner or renter of the car like a parking ticket. I called to inquire about this POS "ticket" and was told that the reason they don't bother trying to ID the driver is that it is treated like a parking ticket. Huh?

What next? I guess in CA if that car was photographed running over someone, the owner or renter would be charged with manslaughter even if there was no proof he/she was driving. Well of course I'm not serious about that happening -- at least not this year in the other 49 states. The polite lady I spoke to about the ticket assured me it wouldn't ever be reported to MVD or affect my insurance. I told her I was relieved to hear that and would simply toss the ticket. She didn't think that was a great idea and warned me I might have trouble with my vehicle license renewal. Huh, but you said it won't be reported, will it? She mumbled something and I hung up the phone thoroughly amazed/baffled/amused and PO'd.

I of course did toss the non-moving traffic, moving traffic ticket, not really a ticket. I also tonight called my credit card company to deny Hertz' attempt to slap a $30 ticket "forwarding fee" on the car rental. I think I'll take cabs the next time I visit CA. I thought the fix-it ticket I got a few years ago in Santa Barbara for having tint on the two front doors' windows was about the dumbest traffic law yet, but this one is 100 times goofier. No wonder CA state government is bankrupt.

Canyon56

It's a way to try to control mishaps and bad driving in the parks. It's just like a parking ticket, so do what you want with it. CA residents who get too many parking tickets either get hassled when renewing tags or at the very worst, get a boot. I know what you're saying about the ID part of it, but again, it's a parking ticket and more or less just a slap on the wrist. If it wasn't you, then contest or don't pay it, or whatever.

But we don't roll through stop signs in our county parks, anyway.

But hey at least we don't have speed cameras on our freeways. "Arizona is the only state to implement "photo enforcement," as it's known, on major highways." In California, speed cameras are illegal.

Chuck W.

Wow, this is the first I have ever heard of this. What a bunch of BS. They will make a ton of money off of the public because by making it a parking ticket type offence you can’t renew your DMV annual registration unless it’s paid.

In California they are big on red light cameras. I personally have no issue with these. Too many people push red lights in LA and cause a lot of accidents. BUT, instead of using them as a tool to stop accidents they took it a step further. They set up cameras at the same intersections to get drivers who don’t come to a complete stop when making a right hand turn on a red light. If you slow to 1 MPH and don’t stop you get zapped with a $400+ fine. A citation (almost) no officer would write. AND, they said it was for revenue gathering purposes. UGH…. not the way it should be.

When I bought the turbo home from Texas I was warned about the highway camera. I noticed them stationed every where. And the Valintine One did not detect them.

make_or_break

A lot depends upon the technology used by the camera. Some systems use loop sensors or pressure strips embedded in the roadway; no need for radar or lasers there. And certainly there's technology that make it possible to use analysis software alone, with no active, transmitting speed detection at all. Video from the cameras can be streamed back to a data center, where the video information can be analyzed automatically by computer for speeders, based on how fast a vehicle travels across the camera's field of view. Since everything is done by computers, a lot of cars can conceivably be processed quickly and across many lanes of traffic, all at one time.

Edward

Yes. And that's the tip of the iceberg. Welcome to the People's Republic of California. Lived here for all my life because of family, weather, and access. But it is, indeed, getting increasingly difficult to stomach the increase in taxation, Nanny-state legislation, and overall moronic governing of what was once a prosperous and wonderful place to live. We once embraced Business and Tourism; we now have been doing a superb job of alienating both.

Edward

Terry Adams

Sorry we equally inconvenience the visitor, as we could use the tourism dollars to offset our $20 billion deficit, but revenue drives our conflicted POV.

The next level of photo recognition in the bankrupt people's socialist republic of California will be the Porsche emblem on your hood.

Edit: Ed beat me to it.

hddude

If I had been driving the Porsche instead of the cheapo rental car, the fine probably would have been doubled, which would make about as much sense as the law itself. By the way it is my understanding that under CA law as it applies to police agencies, a bounty cannot be paid to a servicing company and yet that's apparently what the parks department is doing by paying the company a fee for every culprit nabbed. I guess the parks department must be exempt from the normal laws that apply to policing agencies. You had better hope your CA homeowners' associations don't get wind of this loophole.

Canyon56

fwiw, I think I get a little tired of the CA bashing by out-of-state folks (esp those who love to visit here to get away from too hot or too cold weather.) It's one thing to criticize it if you live here and pay taxes.

Arizona has its crazy laws, too (I lived in Tucson for a few years while on a job there.) And as I mentioned, AZ has invested heavily in traffic control cameras (even on the highways) and contracting with out-of-state contractors.

Every state has budget problems and internal issues. And every state has its pros and cons.

CA is apparently so horrible but the irony is that people keep moving to CA every year.

Maybe just complain about the new systems of traffic control (and revenue collecting) that we see everywhere now in the world, rather than attacking the entire state.

hddude

Did you think I got that goofy fix-it ticket for window tint that I mentioned in my first post as a Santa Barbara tourist? Not that it would be shocking if a tourist did get one.

By the way, I still have a set of California-required catalytic exhausts taken off my Harley the day I bought it if one of you law abiding preachers wants them. Just another example of how the People's Republic acts like it isn't one of the 50 states.

IXLR8

This continent could trash 99% of all stop signs by adopting a European system that works so well.

When approaching an intersection, the vehicle to the right has the right of way.

Ain't that simple!

Edward

I don't know, Canyon ...maybe you saw the OP as CA-Bashing. I did not. I saw him as venting his frustration against legislation that would be just "silly" if it were not for the fact that it is not blatant revenue-generating for stupid pet-projects that don't even work. That's right, don't work ...yet we continue to pay. And remember, not every state is equally idiotic in how it raises and spends its revenue. So criticism toward a given state for what it enacts is, IMHO, perfectly fair.

If it were only "silly" I could laugh. But as a life-long resident, and proud Californian may I add, I am disgusted at how our local, and of late Federal, lawmakers think that they can wave their almighty hands and tax themselves more projects ...as theyignore the people's wishes while taxing us (and enacting fees) into oblivion. Heck, I don't even gross 6 figures and I am incensed at how those who make more money are getting taxed! OK, now I am reeeallly OT, so I'll just leave it at that

Edward

Canyon56

No problem. I'm not a "law abiding preacher," but I guess I see it all a bit differently. All states have some weird laws on the books and many of them are about revenue collecting. If I got a speed camera ticket on an empty stretch of highway in AZ, I wouldn't say that I'll take a cab next time in AZ or that no wonder it's run by corrupt Republicans, etc.. I'd discuss why states are doing this sort of thing everywhere and why certain laws are on the books, etc..

fwiw, ask a CHP officer why he/she doesn't like front tinted windows (hence the tint law in CA.)

If a rolling stop on a right turn in an empty lot or on an empty street seems like no reason to ticket anyone, then what really needs to be addressed is the law. Not the enforcement. The law can't be selective as to who is alert and a good driver versus those who aren't. Its just the way it is.

Sure, we are alert enough to watch for traffic and still do a roll safely, but there's a large contingent who can't and don't (let alone hitting pedestrians trying to cross on their green.) Therefore the full stop on turning right law. And that's the other side of living in a world that's not perfect. We always pay for others' mistakes and shortcomings.

The only answer is to address the law and not the enforcement. Like IXLR8 says, we perhaps need new methods of traffic control in the US.

I'd be curious if all technological devices and contract services were eliminated as monitors of traffic laws, and replaced by actual police officers doing the monitoring. Would we be equally upset and say there are too many police out there enforcing traffic laws? I think it's the remoteness and the faceless technology that equally irritates us, not just the laws.

CAHRERA

HDDUDE

Bottom-line after the DOT COM BUST California became a BROKE-*** State and the State Goverment will try'n do anything to bring in money.

Chuck W.

I always look at the spirit of the law verse the letter of the law. It has moved past that and the laws are being used as a tax revenue raising tool. That is wrong and will cause all kind of push back and problems.

Amfab

Yes it can, human law enforcement can be selective

I dont think its the facelessness, I think it is the obvious fact that safety has become secondary to the generation of revenue as a reason for enforcement that is where the vast majority of the irritation comes from.