and companies who install the cameras win big, while people who don't have their sh*t together enough to fill out the required I'm-poor forms correctly get screwed.
The fine article says that the fines will be reduced based on the speeder's ability to pay, comrade.
I'm dubious of schemes that have disparate impact based on the target's ability to bring about change-- good at politics and paperwork? reduced fine. Not so good? continued death by 1000 bureaucratic cuts.
I'm also dubious of schemes that have low to zero enforcement costs, since the allocation of enforcement resources is one of the most important protections to assure that state intrusion is being directed to matters of actual public consequence.
I'm all for ticketing drivers who are putting the public at risk, but if the risk they're creating isn't worth deploying a citing officer is it really worth the imposition on the recipient of the citation?
and I'm also pretty dubious of schemes with latency and ones where you'll get tripped up without random local knowledge. Go to visit a friend in another city then end up with a dozen fines and a suspended license before you know what hit you.
... and lets not even get into the latent surveillance potential, mass monitoring people's movements on an industrial scale at low marginal cost.
there is a company near UC Berkeley campus filled with people speaking some east slavic language, that has been making red-light cameras for at least ten years. They have expensive office space and no public signage.