Which is why a human being has to review the camera footage and decide to issue the citation. If the system makes an error, and the human checking it makes an error, then the human receiving the citation can contest it. Seems a reasonable number of safeguards to me.
Certainly a lot better than the big tech "we banned you but won't tell you why or allow you to talk to a human about it".
My only problem with more camera-based law enforcement for traffic violations is the fact that they can't tell who was driving. SO the fine goes to the registered owner of the vehicle, so folks won't want to lend vehicles. Of course, one argument is that you shouldn't loan your vehicle to some one who is going to be breaking the law... but is that really the world we want to live in, where we can't loan anything to anyone for fear of them misusing it and the owner being held responsible? I don't have a good answer there.
> one argument is that you shouldn't loan your vehicle to some one who is going to be breaking the law... but is that really the world we want to live in
If you are talking about a car, then yes, that's the world I want to live in. Would they even be insured anyway?
You can get insurance that will cover you when driving some one elses car, and you can get insurance that covers some one else driving your car. Wether either of you have such insurance, is a good question to ask before lending your car to some one.
By default most insurance policies (in the US, at least) cover incidental occasional use of drivers you permit to use your car that don’t actually live with you. They have to be licensed to drive, but that’s essentially the only restriction.
In Ireland/UK, I don't think they cover that at all - They are even a bit sketchy about named drivers. Insurance covering any vehicle tends to be rare b/c they are way more expensive, and usually vocational.
Interesting. Just a quirk of different regions then. In the US it’s essentially assumed that incidental use from friends and such is such a small usage that the insurance risk is minimal.
To be clear, insurance for US vehicles typically only covers a specific named vehicle, although most policies have a few carve outs for specific purposes (eg, 30 days of grace period when you buy a car before adding it to a policy, as well as applying to any car you rent). If the owner of the vehicle doesn’t have insurance and you borrow it, then there presumably wouldn’t be any insurance coverage at all.
On the issue with named drivers: I had two cars, and tried to add a named driver (my partner) to one, but they wouldn't let me. I assume the issue is they thought it likely the ND was the real primary driver, and that I was simply trying to lower their premiums since theirs was higher.
I suspect there's a similar issue with F&F. The cost of insurance is based on you personally, and if they allow NDs, or friends to drive, it's an unknown risk as they can't really tell how much you will actually use the car.
Also, I don't know how much insurance differs between US and EU. IMHO, Irish car insurance is expensive. perhaps due to lenient courts?
I mean, if you switch the word car to any other dangerous object then yes that is the world I want to live in. "Sorry Bob borrowed my handgun and shot up some stuff" isn't a thing that sounds like it would make the world a better place, and yet we treat cars like they are not death machines if misused.
It’s not 1603 where you have to walk 60 miles uphill both ways through the snow and packs of wolves to beg the local lord for mercy. In most places, it’s a form on a web page (I first did that in the 90s!) or dropping a letter in the mail. It’s also very easy to avoid simply by not choosing to stop in the bus lane, which anyone capable of passing a drivers test can trivially do.
If your friend borrows your car and gets a fine in that time, you can pass the fine on to them. If they don't pay it, you can reconsider your friendship with them and possibly take legal action if it's a large fine.
Certainly a lot better than the big tech "we banned you but won't tell you why or allow you to talk to a human about it".
My only problem with more camera-based law enforcement for traffic violations is the fact that they can't tell who was driving. SO the fine goes to the registered owner of the vehicle, so folks won't want to lend vehicles. Of course, one argument is that you shouldn't loan your vehicle to some one who is going to be breaking the law... but is that really the world we want to live in, where we can't loan anything to anyone for fear of them misusing it and the owner being held responsible? I don't have a good answer there.