In this country, in order to convict someone of a crime, it must be proven that the person committed it. In typical traffic tickets, the officer is a witness to the offense and the driver's identity. The cameras provide no such evidence. A car can not commit a crime.

And it DOES matter who was driving because they keep track of repeat offenses for escalating fines, and the insurance company certainly cares too. No matter who is driving my car, I am guilty, even if I loan it to someone, which I am obviously going to have to stop doing. And there's no recourse. It's not a 'legal' ticket. It doesn't come from the court, it comes from the city administration. In order to defend yourself, you can only request a hearing where they simply tell you that they have pictures of your car and because you own it you're guilty. If you wish to appeal after that then you must pay court costs to set up a writ. The system has been completely flipped to 'guilty until proven innocent' and put all the onus on the 'guilty' to prove otherwise. That is bass ackward. That is not the way our legal system is supposed to work. Don't any of you have a problem with that? I certainly do. And so do many other states who have outlawed the practice on a constitutional basis.

And it's not just about the fine. I am fine with paying that (though it's not right that the camera fines are double the cop fines). Any of you ever had a speeding ticket come back to haunt you in insurance costs? With those kinds of compounded penalties, I deserve the chance to defend myself legally. It is my RIGHT to do so.