The Instigator
nonprophet
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
nato1111
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Red Light Cameras need to go

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/15/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 708 times Debate No: 54787
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

nonprophet

Pro

First round is for acceptance only.
nato1111

Con

I accept this debate.

I eagerly await your reply.
Debate Round No. 1
nonprophet

Pro


The people who support these cameras are going down a very slippery slope. I hear they are giving out tickets to people who don't wear seat belts with these cameras. What if the seat belt happens to be the same color as your shirt? Next they want to have "black boxes" in cars so they know every detail of what you do. They might as well sell cars with credit card readers, too, so you can just pay the fines instantly. No need for courts.You'll have at least 25 violations on your trip to the corner store. You didn't signal fast enough, you forgot to check your mirror, you went 1 mph over the speed limit, you parked 1/2 inch too far away from the curb, you touched a double yellow line with a tire....



If you say, "We are giving our rights away, because we consistently fail to accept responsibility for our actions.". You can't be serious. OK...if every car is supposed to be stopped behind some line the microsecond the light turns red, then why not just have a wall pop up where the line is? Nobody will ever hit the wall if they don't break the law, right? Blame yourself if you happen to crash into that wall. My point is, we need to take this on a case by case basis. That's why we trust the police to make a fair judgement before writing a a ticket, and if the officer was wrong with his judgement, he/she can be challenged in court. This isn't about taking responsibility for our actions. This is about being treated like humans. We aren't robots and we have rights. Why should we let robots and machines be able to punish us without question? We aren't perfect, yet we are being held to perfect standards with no way to explain, no way to check if the camera was working right or even being tampered with. If you expect citizens to just shell out hard earned money and "accept responsibility" for everything that big brother accuses them of, you really need to move to Cuba. We are giving our rights away, because we are too busy, too complacent, too lazy, too ignorant and just to uncaring about the precious rights we now take for granted.



When the day comes that you get 25 tickets a day for things you can't go to court for, because it's your word against a camera, black box, radar gun, or some other electronic device, then blame yourself. This isn't the Olympics where 1/100th of a second is justification for a ticket. There are many reasons and circumstances that people cross lines and go through lights that are justified. We are humans and we aren't perfect. Why should we be held to perfect standards? Why should we just pay a fine because a picture was taken? You care about the justice system? Normally a piece of evidence would have to go through a chain of command to prove it wasn't tampered with. Who printed this picture? How did they do it? What kind of printer? Was it working right at the time? How can we be sure it wasn't doctored? If I get a picture/ticket in the mail, I would demand that the every person involved with that picture, go to court and swear under oath what their roll was in handling this picture. That's my right.



There is a system that has worked just fine since traffic lights were invented. It's called a police officer writing a ticket. It's Constitutional, it's safe, it allows you to confront the accuser in court. There is NO justification for giving up rights...not even safety. Wars have been fought and people have DIED to keep us free, and anyone who wants to throw it away because they think it will make them safe deserves neither safety nor freedom. There is no proof that these cameras make the roads safer. They may even be causing more rear end crashes.


nato1111

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for his debate.

ARGUMENT 1#

You argue that they are handing out ticket's to drivers with no seat belts through the red-light camera. This is what they were always going to use them for thankfully they don't have them every were but they are a safety precaution to let driver's know, and also show them they were in the wrong and they could have been killed if they got into a crash. But not just that you are trained, shown how to drive you need to remember those rule's it’s the law there is not excuse it’s for everybody’s safety.

ARGUMENT 2#


Now you are arguing that our rights are taken away when we take don't take responsibility for our OWN actions. Common sense should have told you own up to what you do wrong if not why would you be on the road you should be walking not driving. Now you claim “We aren't robots and we have rights.” Ok that’s fair enough but we still have to obey the law and rules, but not just that, you should have learnt from school and “Life” that disobeying the law is not acceptable. If that is not enough you claim that Citizens should not have to shell out hard earned cash, why not? You broke the law and the rules set in place for your safety and the others around you. If you don’t see the point in red-light camera’s you need to take a step back to realize the bigger picture for example:

  • Safety for you and other’s
  • Another income for the government to pay for everything other’s wreak while running a red light’s

Now you may oppose this idea but if you were to take every Red-light camera down and let the traffic go wild, you would surely see that there would be 10 times more crashes then there would be if there were not red-light camera’s.

ARGUMENT 3#

How can you possibly assume there is going to be black boxes’ in car’s there is no way this is going to happen.

Now you claim that there will be a camera, radar gun, and a “black box” all going to go off at the exact same time making your case nothing, now this is highly unlikely unless you are doing 200 KPH down the main street, and this assumption you are throwing that we should not have to pay a fine that you committed on your own why won’t you own up and take responsibility for what you did wrong. You should know the age long quote “A picture tells a thousand words” you should know that a picture go against everything you say if it is on paper you don’t have a case this is where common sense should kick in and own up to your mistakes and cough up and get on with your life. The only person losing when you dispute the ticket is you.

Beside the point you have claimed you believe that people have possibly edited your picture that landed you in all this mess, now this can be true but 99% of the time the government can be trusted in that section but not any other sections.

ARGUMENT 4#

You claim that it was good before red-light cameras were invented no it was hell for the council and the local police to deal with crazy drivers and hear about people going crazy up streets acting “cool”. But not only that they got into crashes and killed others, and as soon as the red-light camera was implemented there was a sharp fall in illegal doings that citizens were doing in there car’s. Yes I agree that people fought wars to keep us free but we still are free to go about what we want to do if it is safe for us and everybody around us near and far. Now I want you to consider this if you were traveling 110 KPH down the highway it’s a busy day busier than normal you have cars everywhere and you are running late you have just seen the light turn to yellow so you speed up but little do you realize you have no seat belt and you have just run a red-light now you have tens of cars hurtling towards you as you enter the intersection. Then you are then hit by a car from the right then as you are hit you are smashed against the window you then are dragged across by other cars if thing’s could not get any worse the cars have pushed you just enough to nudge you into the other side of the lane you are then hit by another car from the left this second car has hit you with enough power that you are ejected through the FROUNT windscreen you then promptly die as you hit the asphalt if the cars impact had not already killed you. There is not official fact stating that they cause more rear end crashes.” But there has been a survey taken that shows the majority of people want the red light cameras because it enforces the law not breaks it like corruption in the police force.

Thank you for reading I await your reply.

SOURCES:

http://www2.law.ucla.edu...

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com...


http://www.forbes.com...

Debate Round No. 2
nonprophet

Pro

Argument #1

My opponent claims "you need to remember those rule's it’s the law there is not excuse it’s for everybody’s safety."

I'd like to quote Benjamin Franklin:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”

The cameras were intended for people who go through red lights. Now they are being abused and used for other violations.
This is all about money and nothing to do with safety.

The cameras, according to a study, actually cause more accidents.
http://www.motorists.org...


Argument #2

My opponent wants to claim that the cameras are for:

  • Safety for you and other’s
  • Another income for the government to pay for everything other’s wreak while running a red light’s


I doubt very much that they are for safety, since it's been proved that cameras cause more accidents
http://www.nj.com...

Also, car insurance is what pays for car wrecks, not government. The money the government collects on tickets goes in
their pockets and could be used for anything.


My opponent claims, "Now you may oppose this idea but if you were to take every Red-light camera down and let the traffic go wild, you would surely see that there would be 10 times more crashes then there would be if there were not red-light camera’s."
Where's the evidence for that? Studies show that the cameras actually cause more accidents to happen.
http://watchdogwire.com...

Argument #3

My opponent claims "How can you possibly assume there is going to be black boxes’ in car’s there is no way this is going to happen."

It's already happening.
http://www.npr.org...

My opponent claims, " 99% of the time the government can be trusted in that section but not any other sections."
Where's the evidence for that? That sounds made up.

Argument #4

My opponent describes what can happen when you drive recklessly. That has nothing to do with red light cameras. It's just a red herring.

Conclusion:
Red light cameras are there for generating money for the government, which my opponent admits to.
They do nothing for safety, since studies prove they cause more accidents.
They also violate our Constitutional rights to face our accusers in court.

This is why red light cameras need to go.

Thank you for the debate
nato1111

Con

You have much better grammar this round, from the information you have provided to me which I have read over very intently and have been opened to see we don't need Red-light cameras at all! From this I conclude that I have lost this debate due to the over whelming evidence that you have brought to me.

Thank you for this Debate I look forward to the next one.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by nato1111 2 years ago
nato1111
I would like to accept this dabate.
Thanks
No votes have been placed for this debate.