[Mountain_Skies]

The issue I've seen in most of these cases is that they have a difficult time proving who was in control of the vehicle at the time. The ticket is issued to the registered owner of the vehicle instead of the driver. So even if the prosecutor is the accuser based off video, that video evidence often isn't enough to determine who was the offender.

[only_as_i_fall]

Maybe we should stop worrying about it and just fine the car owner. If implied consent laws are legal surely agreeing to be responsible for your own vehicle on public roads would also be permissible under the constitution.

Also, the systems in place for toll road entrances seem to be doing a good enough job. Why can't the same thing be implemented for traffic cameras?

[syshum]

That presumes people agree with the system in place for Toll Roads... I do not that is for sure, so I certainly do not want to expand that to other areas

I am not sure what you are talking about when it comes to implied consent, but in the US At least one is only responsible for their own actions, it is a dangerous precedent to set that a 3rd party should be liable for the actions of others, were by the state can just fine or even arrest someone with out proving them personally committed the offense

No that is not something I want to have applied to anything not even tolls or traffic laws

[only_as_i_fall]

What's your issue with toll cameras? The law is pretty clear in the US that you have no right to privacy in public, and public roads are no exception.

You can fight the fine if it wasn't you in the car and if the picture they took of you is unclear or looks like someone else you can get out of it.

Assuming you're recognizable in the picture what's the issue with that?