Dallas Blog

Yellow means red at NW Hwy and the Tollway & at NW Hwy and Lemmon. Not risking it. I will come to a halt on yellow and sit there for seconds. And if this case settles, I want my hundred and fifty bucks back.

Im all for getting rid of these things, as they're being operated illegaly w/o proper licensing. Also, Get the lazy desk-jockey cops back out in the field and make them do their jobs accordingly.

All part of our reconditioning into the mass surveillance control grid and smothering taxation of the middle class. First it's red light cameras, then it's Perry's "illegal alien checkpoints", and before long, speed cameras... all in the name of public safety. Want to see where we're headed? Search for articles on gov't surveillance and societal control in the UK. They are the global lab rats, and most are accepting it with not so much as a whimper.

The article is interesting, except they left out the fact that the fines are a civil penalty, not criminal. That little detail changes everything.

I'm confused. Didn't you previously link an article from one of our distinguished ultra-right radio stations?

hunter, if only it were that simple.

Running red lights is dangerous and a hazard to the public. Violators are punished and fined for this reason.

Not having possession of one's insurance card is not dangerous, nor detrimental to the public. As such, under section 601.193 of the Texas Transportation Code, charges against violators are automatically dismissed once proof is produced to the court. The purpose of the law is to punish those without insurance, not those without proof of insurance.

Also being ignored by the City of Dallas is that not providing proof of insurance is only a "presumption" that the driver has violated the law. No kidding. The law from section 601.053(b) uses the term "presume." So, the City of Dallas will seize your property based on a presumption and then fine you regardless of your ultimate insurance status. This is backwards from the intent of the law...sounds like a lawsuit is coming to me.

100% verification is one action to take to avoid this presumption.

I received one ticket
here is what I experienced

I got a ticket for running the red light at lovers lane (exit 4) on HWY 75, just north of downtown Dallas.

however, I did not run the red light, I was turning right after coming to a complete stop which is perfectly legal in Texas.

anyway, I got the ticket in the mail, logged in to their website to watch the video (their online video did not work, however you could see in the two still photos me stopped with my red tail lights on in the first, then turning right in the second)

not wanting to waste anybodies time I opted to contest by mail. I sent the reply letter off the day after receiving the ticket.

3-4 weeks later I got another letter in the mail. It said something along the lines, although I was the driver only the registered owner of the vehicle can be ticketed. The owner has 30 days after the first notice was sent to contest.

Not only had they taken about 30 days to tell me this, they did not return any documents for me to have the registered owner 'contest' the ticket who lives at the same address.

I can understand privacy issues in regards to the owner of the car, however, here I am admitting to being the driver and am accused of running a red light, yet they are attempting to collect fees from someone else who was not even in the car? I honestly cant help but think the only reason is that they are using this as a tool to raise money for the city. Giving a ticket to someone who is not even driving the car in no way is 'helping' making the streets safer. Also I heard the city does 'opposite' of this when it comes to them having to pay fees. If a city bus runs a stop light, you can bet they track down the driver and send him a ticket promptly.