Date:         Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:01:21 -0700
Reply-To:     Sean Garrett <SEAN.GARRETT@ASU.EDU>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Sean Garrett <SEAN.GARRETT@ASU.EDU>
Subject:      Beyond friday RE: Photo ticket at stop lights
Comments: To: "Willolyn99@AOL.COM" <Willolyn99@AOL.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

One last post for me regarding this aspect of the debate (see below):
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it then ....

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Marshall [mailto:Willolyn99@AOL.COM]
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 6:47 AM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Photo ticket at stop lights
>
>
> I can't believe all the complaints about not having a "human
> being" be the
> one to give you a ticket.  This is all very simple -- if you
> break the law,
> it doesn't matter who catches you.  You still broke the law.
> This reminds me
> of folks who think cops in helicopters and planes should be
> illegal.  The
> absence of a cop doesn't relieve us of our responsibility to
> follow the laws.
>

I think this applies to the below argument, maybe not. I knew that this
would be a hotly debated topic, but the fact remains: in the "zone" there is
room for indecision/error and that's what I am after. There are always
extenuating circumstances. I am going to court to argue these and to
determine if the camera actually recorded me across the legal line. I don't
believe it did and that this light (and most red light camera intersections)
are/is set up to generate the money to pay for them.

End of argument till next Friday.

Sean Garrett
1981 Westy (his)
1995 Eurovan Camper (hers)
Soon... 1987 Syncro project
sean.garrett@asu.edu