Court rules in favor of Davenport speed cameras -QCTimes
This doesn't surprise me at all.
Actually the only thing I was surprised about was that the ACLU would back a lawsuit so clearly destined to fail. There may be legal challenges to the speed cameras, but this wasn't the route to take. The complaint was that the cameras don't prove that you were driving the car, which is necessary under Iowa law for a speeding ticket.
Too bad they aren't speeding tickets...
Just like a parking ticket, it doesn't matter who put the car there, the violation is still on the owner of the car. The ACLU would have been better off spending their money trying to come up with and support a slate of anti-camera candidates for the next election.
6 comments:
Davenporters can thank Ray Ambrose for the dang camera's.
This was only the start. The ACLU exepected to lose this round. Things will get interesting as the decision is appealed.
ACLU doesn't have a chance. It's legal, it's right, and I don't see this City Council deleting the system.
Is anybody out there, does anyone care....
Hamerlinck, put up, or shut up...
You little piss...
You know comments like that Hamerlinck swipe are just pointless and make you look bad.
I have always left insulting comments alone because they make the person being insulted look better in the eyes of reasonable people.
I feel its funny that I have problems with people who are probably older than me calling people names...
The only image I want to see is those who favor the cameras getting caught by the cameras.
I got a ticket in the mail on Monday. It says I was going 47 in a 35. I say I was going 40. I am going to challenege the ticket because I believe their software is flawed.
Flawed software, that never happens.
Post a Comment