Slashdot Mirror
State Legislators Want Surveillance Cameras To Catch Uninsured Drivers (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes Ars Technica:
A Rhode Island legislative committee has approved a bill that would greatly expand the surveillance state through the deployment of license plate readers. For the first time in the US, these devices would be attached along Rhode Island highways and roads for the stated purpose of catching uninsured motorists from any state... The legislation spells out that the contractor for the project would get 50 percent of the fines paid by uninsured motorists ensnared under the program. The state and the contractor would each earn an estimated $15 million annually. Fines are as high as $120.
Many police departments nationwide are using surveillance cameras tacked onto traffic poles and police vehicles to catch traffic violators and criminal suspects. The proceeds from traffic fines usually are divvied up with contractors. But according to the Rhode Island lawmaker sponsoring this legislation, it's time to put surveillance cameras to a new purpose -- fining uninsured motorists.
Many police departments nationwide are using surveillance cameras tacked onto traffic poles and police vehicles to catch traffic violators and criminal suspects. The proceeds from traffic fines usually are divvied up with contractors. But according to the Rhode Island lawmaker sponsoring this legislation, it's time to put surveillance cameras to a new purpose -- fining uninsured motorists.
and has nothing to do with making a bunch of money
The financial incentive for contractors has to end. If the state is fining uninsured drivers, I have far less of a problem with it. But when law enforcement becomes a corporate profit center, it gives corporations power they shouldn't have. The same goes for for-profit prisons. If any state wants to put someone in jail, the taxpayers should have to shoulder that entire burden.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
A significant part of the horrified reaction comes from the part about 'the contractor gets 50%" of revenue generated. In the US there are -at least formally- limits to what an agency of the state can get away with, (appearances must be maintained) such limits are not perceived to apply to private contractors.
apropos: $CAPTCHA=='slowdown'
So we should enforce these laws differently depending on the color of the perpetrator's skin?
That isn't the only option. In Finland, traffic fines are based on income. One rich guy got a $103,000 speeding ticket.
The contractor is being paid 50% of the revenue because there is no money to paid them a fix amount upfront.
Because the people won't vote to authorize the government to finance such systems through a bond measure or property assessment or any of the other myriad ways revenue is raised for infrastructure projects. So, government does it anyway by doing an end-run around the will of the constituents. Because those "government by the people, for the people" and "by the consent of the governed" tropes have been mostly lip-service concerning anything that really matters for decades.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
"100 miles a day on a bike is nothing. about three hours cycling."
I call bullshit. Have you actually ever peddled a bike more than a couple miles? Doing any sort of extended exertion requires pacing. Sure, Olympic sprint cyclists can hit 45 mph in a velodrome for very SHORT distances, but they wouldn't dream of doing that for even a few short miles.
The Olympic men's individual road race, which is 152.5 miles, was won in a time of 6 hours, 23 minutes and 49 seconds in 2008 (let's round up to 6 hours and 24 minutes). That means he had an average speed of 23.83 mph. If the winning Olympic bike rider rode your hypothetical 100 mile trek at his best competitive speed, it would take him approximately 4 hours and 12 minutes. How long do you think it would take your average Joe or Jane to complete the same hundred mile journey? With water breaks and rest stops, I'd wager 6 to 7 hours.
The US is set up by and large under the assumption that everyone has a car. It is not impossible to live without one, but you'll spend a YUGE portion of your time walking or arranging transportation, even if you live in a city. It is a huge contrast to Stockholm, where I don't even own a car, and having one would in fact be an unnecessary expenditure.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.