Do red light cameras constitute entrapment?

Question

We've got one at almost every major intersection here in Albuquerque, and it's becoming a nuisance. Is there a way to fight tickets from these cameras by claiming entrapment? Or is there another argument that the ticket is not valid?

I'm not a driver, just curious... My mom has started slowing down at every intersection in town, just in case. It's kind of scary, knowing that the city is watching you...

wow, i had no idea what the definition of entrapment really was... that word is thrown around so much, i guess i never really understood it!

a lot of people are asking why i'd be concerned about the ticket not being valid... a lot of times the cameras are tripped by not YOUR bad driving, but that of the person next to you, and your car is flashed instead. i've had friends who have gotten these tickets and unsuccessfully fought them in court.

is this really constitutional? it doesn't seem like it. i was under the impression that there's some stipulation that there must be some sort of reliable witness to a crime for there to be a conviction/fine. i just don't like the feel of these cameras...

Answer 1

look hun a couple points for you to consider
A. people who dont live in abq are only discussing the point of entrapment. they have no idea realyl what we are going through in this city for the most part they dont anyways
B. as far as entrapment no its not per se. but the whole cameras at intersections does reek of big brother bs.
C. you know that i have been caught unjustly at camera intersections and that i know that they cannot be contested in court

cheer up tho by the time you start driving you will be sooo good at it you wont have to worry

Answer 2

Entrapment is where they do something to try to trick you into committing some crime that you might not have done had they not entirced you.

Their theory is that you ordinarily do that crime & they use undercover agents to tempt you to do what they think you might normally do.

We get snail mail or other stuff offerning pornographic images of underage children. A normal person will either throw this in the trash or go complain to the post office. A person who buys the stuff might either get the real porn, or find that the sellers were police doing entrapment.

We drive through a red light district and some person comes up to the car window offering sex for money. A normal person says no thankyou and drives on. Those individauls who accept the offer, either get some time with a prostitute, or are mugged, or find out that this was a police entrapment.

You have some kind of workshop. Some stranger arrives and asks if you would be so kind as to do some modifications on a shotgun for them. A normal person will say that this is illegal, and refuse to cooperate, then as soon as the stranger is gone, call the police and make a full statement. The stranger persists, offers oodles of money, then if you finally agree, you get arrested, finding out that the stranger is really an under cover police officer engaged in entrapment.

I can cite many other examples.

A camera at a red light that someone drives through incorrectly, or is speeding. In no way shape or form are the law enforcement officers doing any entrapment or enticing of people to do wrong.

These cameras are only a nuisance to people who do not obey the traffic laws.

To the extent that people are now obeying traffic laws, who might not have done so before the cameras, that is making the city safer.

I agree about scary. We trust the police to be honorable people, then wonder about what it does to a person's character to have a job that involves spying on people all the time.

Answer 3

No.
entrapment (uncountable)

(law): Action by law enforcement personnel to lead an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime, in order to arrest and prosecute that person for the crime.

How do traffic cameras LEAD an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime? They don't. They catch a person committing a traffic offense. Glad to hear that they are giving your mother a reason to drive more carefully.

Additionally cameras located in PUBLIC areas do not violate privacy as there is no legal expectation of privacy while in a public place. I could legally stand on a street corner and take pictures of anyone I see as long as I don't use them in a commercial manner.

**** Okay you added more ****
You said tripped by the car next to you. - I say BS. That is why the take a picture. Of your car. Over the line.
You asked about constitutional. - You bet, time tested. Have a read of the Constitution to answer that question. Hint, what you are looking for is in the first 10 amendments.

Answer 4

I agree that the cameras are wrong. It's a solution to a problem that failed. But it's not entrapment.
The camera is not forcing you or enticing you into crossing a red light.
One example of entrapment is when an undercover police offers you drug. If you buy it, you're committing a crime. But the crime wouldn't exist without the police selling you. That's the idea of the entrapment.

Answer 5

not entrapment your mom will just have to slow down or pay the fines, but I do have a friend that not only got the ticket dismissed he sued the county that issued the ticket, it was at night and when the lights on the camera went off, I guess they are quite bright, it caused my friend to crash his car into a parked car, it was so bright that it blinded him for a second and that is when he hit the car, the county settled with him out of court!

Answer 6

No. At least not in Illinois. Have had several cases on this and the video not only shows the violation, the license plate, and who is driving. The entrapment defense has failed several times. According to the court public safety trumps any potential for entrapment.

Answer 7

No it's not entrapment UNLESS you can prove the time it takes for the light to go from yellow to red has been intentionally altered for the purpose of issuing more tickets.

If you run a red light and the camera takes your picture. Why should the ticket not be valid?

Answer 8

purple easy cameras are actually not owned with the aid of the police station. they're owned with the aid of a third party organization that supplies a undeniable share of the fines paid to the police branch for doing very nearly not something. working a purple easy and being ticketed is a classification C misdeamenor shifting violation. A purple easy digital camera isn't a shifting violation and is in basic terms a good. because of the fact of this protecting driving isn't required. it somewhat is a CIVIL rely. do not pay the fee ticket. The police can not do something and the third party organization owns the digital camera, they might't do something the two. human beings do not know that, yet as working in site visitors, i do. NO warrants are issued for not paying purple easy tickets. it somewhat is the 1000's of human beings who pay without understanding that that save them in organization.

Answer 9

No, but it does constitute a severe invasion of privacy. But then again why would anyone need privacy. We all need our lives invaded by the powers that be. (Sarcasm)

Actually I am referring to the cameras that the media/big brother
are placing at intersections and on billboards to record traffic
conditions and such. These same cameras can be used and ARE being used to
track the movements of the general population without their knowledge or
consent.

Answer 10

A nuisance huh?... so removing the cameras and allowing people to run red lights would make life in Albuquerque easier?...