Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31491191)

That's true, but if there's a malfunctioning camera, it's pretty easy to "run" the light 5 times in a week if it happens to be right outside your hotel or other temporary place of residence. The problem with camera tickets is that the camera doesn't TELL you it got you, you have to wait for it to come in the mail. Talk to some of the people in places like Edmonton, which deployed a ridiculous amount of photo radar/lidar and some people got like 3-5 speeding tickets before the first one even arrived in the mail. If it had been an officer pulling people over, they probably would have modified their behavior on that stretch of road, but cameras will continue issuing tickets without the feedback getting to the driver until many days pass.



Legally, yes, all the officer must do is prove to the Judge that the defendant was doing PSL+1, and the defendant is guilty (at least in maximum speed law cases). Basic speed law is a bit different, but the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove it was safe to be going faster than PSL.

In a practical sense though, every single driver on the road within my sights would have been ticketed if that was the metric being used. Of course, officers are allowed to use personal discretion and "But everyone else was doing it and didn't get ticketed, Your Honor" is not a valid excuse in court.

Still, there are plenty of ways to get tickets tossed, as the instruments used to obtain speeds are not infallible. Check out this presentation done by another software engineer (not me): https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B941...lQMGdGXzQ/edit

After I got my ticket, I actually bought a LIDAR gun (the same LIDAR gun the officer used to get my speed, the LTI TruSpeed) to see if the so-called "sweep effect" discussed in the presentation is actually real, and I found out that it is. By manipulating it in a specific manner, I have been able to get readings of about 8 mph off of parked cars. Too bad I didn't do this before I got convicted, so that I could show video I took through the scope on the gun to the Judge.

Also, in the case of cameras, and for LIDAR and RADAR guns, not only are they vulnerable to hitting different parts of the car and returning the wrong speed, but they also must be properly calibrated. In the US, they must be calibrated every few years with equipment traceable to NIST. In China, the equivalent of NIST is NTSC but in any case, one thing you can do is you demand to see the evidence that the thing was properly certified. If it hasn't been, then all tickets issued by that camera/gun are invalid.

Originally Posted by moondog (Post 31491212)

Good luck putting these techniques to the test in China.:D

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31486863)

I'm still unclear about whether being caught by camera means you get assessed points on your license or not. Running a red light in China is 6 points; do it twice in a year and your license gets revoked, and if camera tickets count toward that total, that's actually not hard to have happen. Especially if you live there full time.

Originally Posted by JPDM (Post 31489403)

If you pass a red light twice in a year, then I think that they should revoke your license. In any case a red light is 3 points, not 6.

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31491191)

That's true, but if there's a malfunctioning camera, it's pretty easy to "run" the light 5 times in a week if it happens to be right outside your hotel or other temporary place of residence. The problem with camera tickets is that the camera doesn't TELL you it got you, you have to wait for it to come in the mail. Talk to some of the people in places like Edmonton, which deployed a ridiculous amount of photo radar/lidar and some people got like 3-5 speeding tickets before the first one even arrived in the mail. If it had been an officer pulling people over, they probably would have modified their behavior on that stretch of road, but cameras will continue issuing tickets without the feedback getting to the driver until many days pass.

Originally Posted by tauphi (Post 31496822)

Shouldn't be an issue in China. As long as your cell number is up-to-date you'll get a text immediately. You can also stay up-to-date (and pay fines) if you install the official app.

Originally Posted by tauphi (Post 31496822)

Shouldn't be an issue in China. As long as your cell number is up-to-date you'll get a text immediately. You can also stay up-to-date (and pay fines) if you install the official app.

Originally Posted by trueblu (Post 31499656)

Tell me more...we have to manually check a (Chinese) website...which I usually get my assistant to do for me every few months. Would be useful to have instant notification.

tb

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31500770)

Well I guess that means my wife (may) get an alert. Although, I am not sure that facial recognition is that good. There's no way they'd even know to message her (since her number is on my DL application) if they can't identify me in the first place.

Originally Posted by tauphi (Post 31505297)

https://bj.122.gov.cn/

There should be a link to the app from that web site. I presume your car is registered in Beijing but if not, then you should switch over to the site local to your province/city.

Originally Posted by tauphi (Post 31505301)

It goes to the vehicle owner. It's up to the owner to identify the culprit.

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31507219)

Well that would be a problem, if the vehicle owner doesn't immediately notify the driver, no? Especially if there's a malfunctioning camera in an area that the driver is circling around again and again.

Originally Posted by moondog (Post 31507228)

If the owner doesn't notify the driver, the points and the fee are their responsibility.

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31511017)

Well that would also be a problem. First of all, I don't think my parents in law would voluntarily rat me out. Nor would I voluntarily do the same to them, if I owned a car over there. Proving who was driving is the government's burden, not their (or my) responsibility. If they really wanted to know, they should have put officers on the streets to take a look at the driver's license on the spot, but if the camera didn't get a good view of who was driving and it was the registered owner, OR if the registered owner was NOT driving, then all I'm telling them is that the registered owner was NOT driving. I'm not snitching on friends or relatives since I'm not legally required to do the prosecution's research.

Originally Posted by STS-134 (Post 31511017)

Well that would also be a problem. First of all, I don't think my parents in law would voluntarily rat me out. Nor would I voluntarily do the same to them, if I owned a car over there. Proving who was driving is the government's burden, not their (or my) responsibility.....