It Is Against the Law to Coat Your License Plate to Evade Traffic Cameras - Lehto's Law Ep. 4.18
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- Some people try to avoid traffic camera tickets by coating their license plate with something - or wrapping it in plastic wrap. Is this legal and will it work? There is a podcast of this video: / it-is-against-the-law-...
www.lehtoslaw.com
To talk to much and are boring
Yes. I am boring. That is why no one watches the videos and no one subscribes to my channel. I'm surprised you even commented. As far as I can tell, you're the only person who has seen this channel since it went up.
Soooo, I guess dude should add drums, a guitar and start _singing?_ Regardless...be sure to stay in school (or go back) until you can understand the difference between "to" and "too" and ALSO that sentences should end with a little dot called a period.
It was so boring that I subscribed
Too
Sterling, give us all a break, you're, getting legal advice, from a seasoned attorney FOR FREE! No one forced you to watch the video, which is FREE. He covered the topic in detail, even giving insight into how the legal system deals with this subject, oh did I mention all this for FREE! NOTE to Steve Lehto, I only found you a couple weeks ago and have at least 10 of your video's viewed, Thank you for your kindness in providing this to us, for FREE.
I am an airline pilot and was based in Phoenix at the time. Phoenix decided to install speed cameras on the freeway. The freeway ran right next to the airport. We were coming in to land and the camera went off and blinded both of us flying the airplane. We filed the proper reports and the camera was switched to red lenses within a week. Apparently, the red does not work as well and they were removed within a month. They removed all the speed cameras with 5 miles of the airport.
They should have arrested the people that had it put up with interfering with a flight crew. Put 'em in jail for years.
@@robertthomas5906 DAMN RIGHT! Could have caused a HORRIBLE ACCIDENT!
@@jtc1947 i agree. If it was someone with a lazer pointer they'd be all over it. But government does not go after government. No money to be made.
@@robboat6269 VERY TRUE!
I actually am a pilot, and what you posted it utter garbage.
I'm a fan of the people that throw a tire around the cameras and lights them on fire. Doing gods work.
We had a guy in our area just take some black spray paint and give a small puff over the lens. Man is a hero
True patriots against the beauracy.
@@neillcoetzer9133 How about a spray can in a drone.
@@chargermopar I just like the simplicity of the original. Just part around the corner. If anyone sees it they won't say anything because they also hate it. And at least here we don't have much surveillance
Quite a few years ago in Newark, NJ, one of the new traffic enforcement cameras at a very busy intersection had been shot out. When the local news covered it, it was kind of funny that while the officers at the scene clearly didn't condone it, they seemed impressed by the accuracy of the shots.
I'm not so concerned about the red light or speed cameras. I'm very concerned about the license plate readers that record your location, date and time and store that indefensibly by private companies and is sold back to law enforcement and other government agencies. I personally think this is a violation of privacy. The government should not be tracking citizens who have not committed a crime.
I oppose both and see each as unreasonable searches and violations of privacy.
If I am ever a juror in any of these cases I force the jury to sit and deliberate for weeks if need be before I vote to convict
Sorry but if you are in public anyone can take a picture at any time. It's been to the Supreme Court multiple times. You have absolutely no right to privacy outside of your house.
(laughing big time!)
Every time you drive with a cell phone in your car it is noticed by every communications device it passes. It is trying to set up a link, and the name of the link and the linker are both passed to the cell phone company. Your GPS location information is sold to business that want to advertise to you, for instance the coffee shop you pass wants you to stop and buy coffee. They'd rather advertise to you than anyone far away, and they'll pay a penny for the privilege.
You're worried about a camera taking your picture? Your location is recorded electronically hundreds of times per block...
@@geraldfrost4710 I don't keep a cell phone with me.
@@thomasmendez2816 Yep!
How dare people stop the state from extorting them.
I wonder how many judges would also agree that the flash from that strobe constitutes a road hazard/distraction.
My plastic wrap is made domestically, it is not a foreign material. lol
They have a nasty tendency to shorten yellow lights at photo enforced lights
My Dodge Coronet has the gas filler behind the license plate and folds down to access the cap. Too bad it always seems to fall down when the traffic cameras are around.
unfortunate design characteristic. costing the city hundreds!
I drive my 16 year old Durango on 25 miles of gravel roads every day and its been years since it’s been washed. The only time my plate is legible is once a year when I have to clean the corner of it to apply the new tag. I live in Michigan and have never been stopped for it.
When I lived in Michigan I got stopped because I had snow on my plate after a snow storm. St. Joe county Michigan sheriff fucking sucks. He's a Money hungry thug
Basically it's only illegal if it works. If it doesn't work, it doesn't obscure the plate so it doesn't meet all the requirements of the law in question. Also, if it does work, becomes a big problem, so the cops come up with some way to detect it. Like random monitored areas that flash as cars go by to test if a plate is treated like this and they stop the vehicle further up the road. What's stopping people walking around with a can of this stuff and spraying other peoples' plates in an attempt to get them in trouble? And there is your defence, "Anyone could have sprayed my plate with that stuff, it certainly wasn't me and I had no way to know it was there to clean it off".
It's only a civil, not criminal offence, so the burden of proof is pretty low. They just have to think you probably did it, and the fine would stand.
Hi Steve: I have listened to a lot of your videos and enjoy them very much. You give a gift of info from a lawyer that most people would not be able to afford. This video brings up the problem of intersection cameras. Many people think they are unconstitutional and tell everyone to fight these tickets. I never thought about them much other than to think they give tickets to people who speed. Then one day I got a ticket from one of these from a city 150 miles away from me that I have only been to once in my life and that was when I was young and I was on a bus.. I called the police to argue that it was not me and they said I had to take it up with the judge. They did not send me a photo so I requested that they look at it closer and make sure they send me one as they should have. When he said the plate was on a van I explained that I have never had a van in my life, he was going to give me a ticket for putting the plate on a van as well. After a lengthy discussion he looked close enough to see it was a plate from BC in Canada and not mine. They sent me a letter that said after an investigation they were going to cancel the ticket. I started to wonder if this was a common mistake or if there was something else going on.
I got another ticket sent to me from a city 50 miles from me for 10 over the limit. I always do my best to never speed and have never got a ticket for speeding before in my life so was very surprised by this. I found out that my speedometer was out about 5 but that would not explain why they claim 10. I came to the conclusion that there camera must be out as well. They claim that the cameras are 100% accurate. My investigation convinced me that they are not that accurate at all and in some cases their accuracy is zero. There are some cars that these cameras do not see at all so they can speed at any rate they want past these cameras and not ever get a ticket. Can a person challenge these cameras on a constitutional ground that they violate the constitution because they do not treat all citizens equally under the law?
The sensor under the road only picks up on steel belted tires and not teflon corded racing tires. A person who has an alloy frame and rimes with racing tires can go any speed they want past these cameras and never get a ticket. The company that makes the cameras explain on their site that an officer must do math calculations for both distance and angle for each lane to set up the camera. I asked officers if they do that and they said that they never do. They would mean they are putting the wrong speed on the tickets. It turns out that they also make a mistake in the math for miles per hour. To tell if a person is going the posted speed limit they must clock you for one mile to miles per hour. It is an average of how fast you drive in one mile. The radar clocks you for 1/10 000th of a second for about 1/16 th of an inch. They do not even do the average for the mile but ticket you as if you were going that speed for a mile. They have no data on the mile they claim you were speeding and they did not clock you for that mile. This is a major math error on these cameras because the road is posted in miles per hour. The other part of this fraud is that they change the time to as little as 2.5 seconds for the yellow light that makes it impossible for a person to stop before the red light. The yellow light should be at least 6 to 8 seconds and a count down timer to show how long the yellow light has been on. The fact that they change the yellow light is evidence of fraud to force people to run the red light. This time has been recorded on tickets to show it was reduced to 2.5 seconds.
I found about ten things that make these cameras unconstitutional and a scam to rip off the citizens and . There have even be government officials who have taken bribes to vote these in against the citizens wishes. My question to you is how would a person fight these in court on a constitutional argument to get the ticket thrown out???
Thank you for the time you put into your channel to help people understand the law in a fun and educational way. I am sure there are thousands of people who would love to hear what you have to say about this.
Owen Prince
Red light camera now illegal in tx
Ohio supreme court passed a law that said speed/red light cameras can be used but a police officer has to be at that location or all tickets will be voided. So basically Ohio has no more cameras because they couldn't station an officer at each location.
in the city of Cincinnati. we passed an anti cammara law . a few years ago
You are about 3 years out of date there. They ruled last summer that the state can't place any restrictions on traffic cameras. It conflicts with cities home-rule authority
They always pull me over, whether I have a license plate or not.
We need to start taking a bat to these equipment happens enough times they stop fixing the cameras. Not to mention the camera’s are run by a private company the city doesn’t even own them.
My ex hasn't got a ticket in 40 yrs. she just flies her broom stick over the camera's ,their pointed towards the ground .
RED LIGHT CAMERAS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
For a variety of reasons by the courts. Not only are they money driven but sadly rear end collisions go up about 60%. Here are some points for your review and consideration.
1. If states don't authorize red light cameras cities and towns lack the inherent authority to install them. Courts would lack Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
2. No Due Process: Tickets have a right to be appealed.
3. Driver needs to be put on notice at scene: Operator has a right to gather evidence and/or witness statements. Not weeks later with fine in mail.
4. Presumption of Guilt: Ticket sent to owner of car not the operator of the car. This is a moving violation.
5. Shifting Burden of Proof: It's unlawful for government to shift burden of proof from themselves to the owner showing who was driving. It's the government's burden.
6. Different fine if from camera: You can't have different fines for the same violation. Camera fines can't be different from police issued ones. Court in FL stated police tickets were invalid because the fines were higher than cameras. Must use less intrusive fine.
7. Camera company can't issue fines and mail tickets: Only a police officer can legally issue summons.
8. Cities are endangering children and families by illegally shortening yellow light so more cars can't stop in time. Thus forcing them into more intersections. Many states have standards on how long the yellow light must be on prior to red light coming on. Camera companies were complaining about low revenue so yellow lights were shortened by the city in order to drive up cash flow. In other words, cities are risking more lives so to create additional cash flow. That isn't for safety reasons.
9. States also have on the books that if you can't stop safely for red light. To proceed cautiously.
10. Equal Protection: Fines for the same offence can't be differant under the law. The laws and funes MUST be the same no matter what part of the state your in.
11. Confrontation Clause: Cameras can't be in control by 3rd party. Ticket holder can't confront a 3rd party or camera in court.
12. Owners of cars do not have to pay for moving violations of others.
In those rulings the cities had to pay back millions of dollars including the money they loss to camera companies.
Many years ago I was in a window tinting shop and they were tinting the driver and passenger side windows on a car. I mentioned that I thought it was illegal to have tinted side windows in Missouri (where I am). They said it's not illegal for us to tint the windows, YOU just can't drive with them.
the cameras should not be allowed - it was raining and the light was changing - the car behind me was not slowing down, I continued through the yellow light so I would not get hit from behind - the picture does not show what's really occurring.
I"m a fan of the "computers are stupid" argument.
There is also another way to do this and that is to mount a infrared light by your plate pointing toward the camera. It doesn't have to be big, they make small ones. You may have to mount two, I don't remember. But your not altering the plate in any way. The infrared light is not visible to the human eye, but it over expose the photo severely and they will be able to read the plate.
I suspect that would only work if the infrared light source was very bright (I'm thinking of a laser) AND if the film in the camera was sensitive to infrared light. If the police are using a camera with a visible light flash, then they are not using infrared film.
I think the end of your answer fell into a NOT hole.
Is it okay for citizens to set up machines to watch the police
You are missing a big point to this, traffic cameras are illegal. This is why traffic cameras are civil and not criminal. You cannot face your accuser in court with a traffic camera. While attending a defensive driving class the instructor explained this process as a side conversation. He himself told the collection agency pursuing the fines to screw. This is why it goes through collections and NOT the court.The camera does not indicate if the light malfunctioned? The camera cannot determine an emergency situation where Police or fire vehicles may be causing delays or stoppages at the intersection or roadway. Traffic cameras violate constitutional rights on every angle... so why this discussion?
EXACTLY! Lots of truth and knowledge in your statement...But did anyone else overstand it? The lawyer's interpretation of traffic law seems to be extremely limited.
Well, that's fun... and brings up a new question: When, if ever, does a collection agency stop trying to collect? After all, aren't you responsible for the legal costs if they win? And, can't they simply have the DMV revoke your licence?
@Tony Samson Hi! I thought they were in cahoots on this...
What about the guy in the Netherlands that stole a cops plate put it on his car and blew past a speed cam at over 100 lol.
That's funny as shit, don't give me any ideas......too late! Probably doesn't have to be a license plate for the camera to read the number. Just find out the plate number of favorite judicial thug and make a temporary plate then run around and do your deed.
Now they have a picture of the car that the idiot was driving in with the stolen plates. And a picture of the "honk if you love seals!" bumper-sticker...
I stopped but my front wheels went over the line. The red light camera took a photo and sent me a $300 ticket. I went to the courts to try to fight it. They wouldn't let it go. In fact there was a room full of people all with the same complaints and the only ticket the judge let pass was a pregnant woman who said she was going the gyno for "woman issues". The 30 or so people that with me were pretty upset seeing we didn't run a red light but we couldn't prove that we weren't still moving even though the speedometer clocked me going 9 mph at the time. Funny thing is I didn't write a check to the city I got the ticket in. It was to a 3rd party company in Cincinnati Ohio and why it was so hard to fight as I would have to petition for pictures, video, calibration of the machines used and it would just take too much time and effort than to pay the ticket. It's a scam. It's a freaking scam and all red light cameras should be taken down.
I think going over the line is a violation too so technically you may have either ran a light or committed another violation.
It is obviously for generating revenue. All the speed/red light camera companies are from Europe. Definitely Orwellian.
Stopping beyond the line is also a violation.
You impede pedestrian traffic, crossing at the intersection.
Also if it's a four way intersection you're obscuring a right turning motorists vision who now has to move further into the intersection, beyond were you are to see oncoming traffic that you are blocking.
You didn't drive through a red light but you were still in violation of another law. 🙁
The stuff does somewhat work. I put some on my truck when it came out just to check it out and it made my plate partially obscured to the infrared security camera outside my office. I'd imagine surrounding the plate with IR led's like people do these days would definitely overexpose the plate. If the cops want to send out a team of scientists to examine someone's plate they could prove that $100 case. But I doubt that would be profitable to their extortion racket.
They don’t Mail the driver a ticket, they mail the registered owner a ticket.
Yeah, just like parking tickets! My daughter drove my car during college and I had a steady stream of parking tickets constantly.
These cameras were ruled unconstitutional in the state of Florida yet some counties still utilize them. Total bull#$@&!
It’s still rampid in KCMO. They treat it like a cash cow.
I have a bike rack for 2 bikes and when I haul my bikes I never get a bill when crossing toll bridges in Florida. I only haul my bikes when my wife and I go riding and didn't do it to hide from paying tolls. I just figured it out recently.
What about mounting the registration plate horizontally upside down?
One of my maintenance techs that works for me took me out to his car during lunch and showed me his new invention. He had me stand behind his car and when he flipped a hidden switch, a cover shot up out of its hiding place and covered his plate. He is an RC hobbyist and used his little servos and actuators to make the mechanism. The fabric is like an accordion bellows or one of those hand held fans that spread out. It goes up in about half a second and will stay there until the switch is turned off. He says he uses it when he goes over the Indiana-Kentucky border on the Louisville bride. It's a toll bridge without a toll booth. It snaps a pic of your plate and mails you a bill. Very cool.
Definitely illegal
Old hat. James Bond had something like that on his Aston Martin DB5 in _Goldfinger._ That was in 1964.
@@Milosz_Ostrow Old hat, true, but still works!
Second microphone left is the infamous D-104 Citizen Band Mic. As a kid, I saved for months and purchased this mic back in 1973 for my CB base unit.
I have a shutter that covers my plate when it detects a bright flash ... lol 😅😂😂
Do you also have spinning-hub tire-slashers and an EMP behind your front grille? ;)
By the time the thing detects the flash, it is too late. The speed of light is way faster.
One thing comes to mind is shouldn’t we have the right to face our accuser how does it work with machines that are more or less inanimate
He covers that in another video.
It's called court!
Because S.J. hasn't figured it out, in the states that have allowed speed/red light cameras they have categorized any ticket issued by those systems as "civil penalties" against the vehicle and not a crime with no points on your license because usually they don't get the driver and so can't prove who was driving, meaning your right to face your accuser isn't valid, if you fail to pay them the fine just gets bigger but no bench warrant can be issued because again, no crime has been committed. Instead if they can find the vehicle with enough owed they take it as payment/collateral.
I know a guy here in MI that got pulled over in his Tesla because he had a cover that was suppose to block cameras that the cop said obscured the plate. He also got pulled over for driving his convertible Porsche while wearing a spiderman mask but that is a whole nutter story.
easy to spot the cover, harder to spot the clear-coat hehe.
Technically, the flash reflected obscures the camera. The spray does not affect the plate's legibility, the flash does that to the camera.
Also, since the flash originates elsewhere, it is the camera's flash that is causing the camera to read the plate as illegible.
We have people here with dark plastic "dust covers" over the plate. You can't even read these in the middle of a sunny day. Yet they seem to go completely untouched for it.
Those are probably illegal too; they just haven't been caught and ticketed yet.
A wise man once said. It isn’t illegal if you can’t be caught
Jason Rockafellow...lol....facts!
This whole question boils down whether or not people in general have any input into the laws and regulations they must live by.
lol, we do have control.. but noone puts forth the effort to be in a position to have input into the laws and regulations they must live by. We're all too busy trying to survive, and stalking our EX's on fakebook. Run for local office.. that's where the real power is. The Feds cannot do anything, they are hamstrung by decades of rot and bloat. Organize your community, and then complain about the laws.. it's much easier to do something about it from within.
Can you place your license plate upside down? It will be horizontal! If you get a special license plate, will just letters, say HIOWOM, then you might confuse the software that runs the software.
Is it legal to spray the whole area by the license plate but NOT the plate with this spray?
Free of foreign material to obscure or partially obscure the license plate. Many many many people use drive through car washes that also wax the vehicle including the license plate. So spray the whole vehicle, it's no longer targeting the plate but instead is a coating applied to the whole vehicle.
Skip ahead to 14:00 and listen for 30 seconds. That is all you need.
@@jasonbourne1596 Pls advise about being wrong? Serious question?
@@jasonbourne1596 Wrong about what??? If they don't get a usable image then you don't get a ticket. Yes or no?
The spray is retro-reflective microbeads from 3M and it can make older cameras overexpose images where a flash is used. Here in California however, many red-light cameras are a live video feed with a remote human viewer assessing each infraction. Both the video and the viewer are unaffected by the retro-reflective spray. The flash is merely to scare you so you are wary of the system when you drive by (thus making compliance higher).
Why would the do that with the flash, they are in it for the cash. Yes they want all they can get. Most places they post it so you are definitely aware of them.
How come you never talk about the Transportation Act and how it applies too commerce and how it doesn't apply too non- driver status citizens?
He's talked about it several times - look up traveling - requirements to have a driver's license, etc... The real focus of what you're looking for is "sure you don't 'need' to have one or aren't 'required' to have one" but it boils down to if you've ever had one (you're in the system) or if you're willing to be hassled by "the man" you can go without. If I were single, never submitted my SSN for anything, ever (basically opted out of most of society) there's little they could do to "compel" you to do those things. My go-to response is "just look at the Amish" they've never opted in to most of this stuff therefore they aren't compelled....
When I began as a deputy in Palm Beach county all moving violations were $25.00 and non moving were $15.00. In the late 70s the State of Florida tried to raise moving violations up to $55.00 and the public outrage made them discontinue those efforts. Today these tickets are way into multiple hundreds of dollars. Speed in an active construction zone and fines are doubled. So, a speeding ticket could cost several hundred dollars easily. Add to that the fact your insurance company will raise your premiums way up too and it is a disaster financially.
Most people I know are one speeding ticket away from virtual homelessness, it’s a precarious financial situation these days
I know you didn't get into the whole red light camera controversy, (maybe that would be a good topic to talk about), but here is my experience with them here in Texas:
I received a red light "ticket" in the mail one day. Upon opening it up, it looked like a ticket but instead of saying "citation", it said "violation". It was signed by a police officer, and next to the signature was a statement saying that the officer had reviewed the video and determined it was valid. It did not appear to be a normal traffic ticket, and you were supposed to send the $75 "fine" to a company in Airzona called RedFlex Traffic Systems. I smelled a rat, so I decided to fight it. I contacted the company and scheduled what I thought was a normal traffic court hearing....oddly, it was to be held at the local public library's conference room. On the day of my hearing, I showed up to the library and along with a lot of other people, waited to see the "judge". Everyone that came out said that the "judge" had found them guilty. When I went into the room, there was a police officer and a woman in the room. The woman opened my file, then showed me a video of a car similar to mine going through a red light at an intersection. She asked me if that was my car. I said I did not know because I could not read the license plate in the video. She then showed me a photograph of my license plate and asked if that was my license plate number and I said yes. She then said that the photograph proved that the video was my car and that I was found "guilty" of this offense and had to pay. I told her that just because she had a picture of my license plate without context did not prove that the car in the video was mine. I then asked her if she was a judge and she said no, that she was an arbitration mediator. I then asked her who she worked for and she declined to answer. I asked again and at this point the officer came up behind me and told me to quit "disrespecting" the woman and to “let her do her job”. I was not being disrespectful; I was simply disagreeing with her logic and politely asking her who she worked for in an effort to discover the motivations at play here. She finally did admit to being employed by RedFlex and the officer didn’t like that I was starting to put two and two together and he warned me yet again and then told me this wasn’t a discussion that I was to accept what she told me and to sign the paperwork she presented. I felt threatened by the officer that if I didn’t sign, something would happen to me. He seemed to be there solely for intimidation. I was told by the woman that I could appeal this decision and have my case heard before a REAL judge. I filed an appeal and in order to get a court date I had to pay a $75 bond and was told that if I was found “guilty”, the bond would be forfeited to pay the "fine". When I went to court in front of the judge, I told him that I felt I was not afforded due process to face my accuser in this matter due to it being an automated device that was being used. The judge said he agreed with me but that he had been instructed by “higher ups” that should any of these cases were to come before him, he was to rule in favor of the city/RedFlex. He ruled that I was guilty, and since I had already put up the $75 bond, the matter was concluded and I was out $75.
One problem I noticed on these cameras is that if you are turning right on red and you stop too far back from the white line before turning right, the camera thinks you didn't stop and takes your picture and you get a ticket.
Our system is broken, we need a serious reset. Money grabbing schemes from victimless crimes.
Were their kangaroos in that "court"?
I just wanted to know if it works. I assume anything that would interfere with the government collecting money from the citizens would be illegal. In fact, if you dig deep enough just about everything you do during a normal day is illegal.
@ Thomas.....YUP! Greedy politicians ALWAYS looking for money!
I would disagree, because a good attorney could argue that if you're going to say that foreign material on the license plate is illegal, then would a good spray on wax during a car wash would also be illegal. Because a spray on wax might make the plate shiny enough to disturb an image with a camera flash.
Js...
A good attorney would not make that argument for you - since ANYTHING sprayed on your license plate as described in the law would be illegal. Did you hear an exception for "car washes"?
It's illegal for "your" license plate to be dirty enough for it to be difficult to read. License plate frames that obscure the numbers and letters on the plate are illegal as well.
Cops enforce traffic laws that their supervisors tell them to enforce and ignore the rest. They're working stiffs much like other wage slaves.
The cop you see ignoring all sorts of traffic violations may not be in his sector. He gets no credit toward his quota for writing citations in another sector. Exceptions are those motorists who are going way over the flow of traffic, appear drunk, etc. but even then a cop not in his sector most likely will radio for the cop(s) who cover that sector to pick the reckless driver off.
Thanks for the reply Steve. I hear what you're saying 100%, my thought process though was about the wax is that that law or statute could be struck down as overly broad. If it were to be brought to the judge's attention that a law abiding citizen could accidentally be prosecuted for it.
It's funny a few years ago Providence, RI tried speed cameras. Instead of defeating them via modifications to the registration plates they were actually destroying the cameras. I thought that was interesting. The city quickly removed the cameras after several had been shot at, burned, etc.
Another fun one - I was on I-95 in Warwick, RI doing 90MPH. I see a car coming up on me, it's a RI State Trooper - he passed me doing roughly 120MPH. Shocked the hell out of me.
And regards red light cameras.I had the perfect out. I was walking around one morning and came upon a red light camera just flashing at random. I had to record that one.
Is it against the law to coat the camera?
🤣😂😎
You have the right to face your accuser in court. Bring that camera in for questioning.
They'll show you the picture.
The way washington gets around this is they have an officer view the evidence provided to them (the picture/video) and the officer is the one who will make the accusation and show up to court.
When you plead not guilty the fine on the ticket does not apply. The Judge can then impose the maximum if he thinks you are wasting the Courts time. Many years ago I wrote a summons to someone for driving a vehicle on the sidewalk. He spent hours drawing on a poster board/oak tag the dimensions of the corner, building, parking lot etc... then drew a rectangle on the sidewalk. Judge asks me " Officer is this a reasonable depiction of this corner" My reply was that I had never measured the dimensions but that it appeared to represent the corner, building etc... Judge asks the guy "Whats this rectangle" on the sidewalk. Guy goes my car. If the guy plead guilty and mailed the ticket in $35.00. For wasting the Courts time Fine $250.00. PRICELESS.
Cop can't be a witness because no 1st hand knowledge. State/county/city can't be complaining party because no 1st hand knowledge. Camera can't be complaining party or witness because it can't be questioned. Voila. No court case. Just be willing to bare teeth in court.
Nowhere does the law state that the license plate cannot be upside-down..LMFAO...
What about illuninating the plate with a very bright IR light? that will prevent a digital camera form taking a photo of it.
Was thinking the same thing. You could surround the plate with bright IR LEDs facing out toward the camera.
It is only foreign if the saran (cling wrap) wrap is manufactured outside the USA.
I just drive the speed limit or 5 mph faster. Way less stressful.
I try to stay under 80 on a 65 high way. My general strategy is simply to never be the fastest idiot on the road, and definitely no speeding or only a few MPH in towns.
@@KrazyKrzysztof that wouldn't work in Australia. They have a 2km/h tolerance which is a bit more than 1mph.
Not convinced, Steve. While yes, the spray could be deemed "foreign material" it does not make the license plate "illegible". Let's not forget that the definition of "legible" is the ability for someone (as in; a person with normal visual capacity) to read it. It does not extend to modes of technology designed also to read anything.
Therefore a defendant can invite a jury or judge to a parking lot to see his/her vehicle and prove that the plate is indeed "legible" by the legal and dictionary definition of the term. There is no duty on the part of any driver to ensure their plate is "legible by any person, device or employed technology designed to read the symbols thereon". Until such a specific definition is passed into law, the spray coating remains perfectly legitimate.
So long as the plate remains "legible" (readable by a person), it remains legal.
In fact, I shall go farther: The term "legible" includes the definitions, "decipherable" and "easily deciphered". Meaning a license plate could be written in code! So long as a that code is "decipherable" or "easily decifered", it remains "legible" and therefore 'legal' by the definitions of the statute.
In some states their constitution states that you can only be issued a traffic violation from a court of law or an officer of law enforcement that witnessed the violation and not from these camera companies, a lot of cameras got done away with. If it doesn’t go against the person’s driving record then what the hell good is it? People think oh I’ll just pay the money no big deal, and continue doing it!
Revenue machines period.
You say the law states you can not use a foreign object to cover your license plate. What if it was made in the USA
😂😂😂 Now THAT'S lawyer talk!
You might well be sanctioned for incompetent representation.
I can't imagine anyone has gotten a ticket for having a plate that's too clean and shiny. Has anyone? And why not spray the whole back of the car with it? Make the glare without spraying the plate at all.
Stinky Cheese he was suggesting to spray the rear of the car, leaving the plate untouched. This way the traffic camera flash will reflect off the now coated rear of the car, resulting in a washed out photo for the camera
New Hampshire law prohibits automated plate readers except at toll booths. Cops are not allowed them.
can i register my car remotely?
We are the only state to have this law
@@cccEngineer
What good would that do? It does not affect what other states do when driving there.
We also do not require insurance but to drive in other states we must have it.
I was quite use to "traffic cameras" long before anyone was using them here in the United States. That's because I spent the majority of my time in the military overseas in Germany where the use of these devices has been prevalent for many years. I did a lot of traveling between Frankfurt am main to Mannheim and they had a speed camera on an overpass in a 100km zone near Darmstadt that they probably put up when they built the overpass, it's been there that long. The procedure is that should you trip the camera they send you a ticket along with the photo of the rear of your car and your license plate. If you pay it all well and good. However, if you contest it, they send you a picture of the front of your car showing the driver along with a new ticket with an added administrative fee. One day a friend of mine asked to borrow my Mercedes so that he could go to the Rien Main A/B to pick up a friend who was coming back from leave. I said sure, tossed him the keys and thought no more about it. A few weeks later I get the photo and fine in the mail. I took it to the German Liaison Officer at the Military Police Station to find out what was going on because knowing where the speed trap was, I always made sure I never exceeded 100 km per hour through that zone. After a few minutes and questions such as "are you sure you weren't driving in this area...", he gets the photo showing the front of my car and who was driving faxed over. At this point I must mention at the time I was about 195#, 6'1" and white. My friend, because it indeed was him zipping along at 145 km an hour. He was about 6'4'', 260# and black. I drove back to our unit, handed him the ticket and told him to slow down when coming through Darmstadt. We both had a good laugh.
Stationed in Darmstadt 1966-69. Can confirm the existence of this system. However, it was not abused by the German authorities. Can U.S. locations using cameras claim that?
so I can spray someone elses license plate to get them in trouble
pollution, dust and other foreign substances are illegal
It's a good question, especially if you have made a visual check on your own number plate. Have you done due diligence if someone else sprayed your plate.
I drive a pickup in CA. It has an AZ plate which is on the rear only. I leave the tailgate down and the cameras cannot see the plate. Nothing illegal, I have homes in both states. Registration and Insurance in AZ are far cheaper than in CA.
EVERYTHING is cheaper in AZ than in CA.
I have a 2013 Ford F150 and I've been meaning to try it out but I was under the impression the tailgate wouldn't be long or wide enough to obscure the plate. I travel around quite a bit in NYC including Long Island and in NC and I've been noticing a disturbing trend of those cameras being lowered and lowered. From my perspective the government and the traffic camera vendors have become privy to that little trick and as such have lowered their cameras to combat it. Also worth noting the traffic cameras are being placed on street corners versus long stretches of blocks. But either way I'm gonna give it a try and hope for the best so please wish me luck on my grand ventures of driving. Peace.
This fancy crap is really just clear coat enamel. I have it in my bike plate. 3 or 4 coats works just fine. Very bright light reflects off the surface, not so bright reflects from the base (factory) paint on the plate. Two shade flip flop paint uses the same principal. Also, this is why clear coat makes a paint job look shiney. Thanks to my autobody man brother Dave.
See I'm personally researching this not because of tickets. They're outrageous but that's fine, what has me looking into this is license plate camera tracking. And the fact third party companies are also working with this data.... That terrifies me.
Most states have had cameras for decades, before they gave tickets.. You'll hear it's for traffic control- even in small two bit towns. That it's to establish fault in wrecks- but you, nor investigators, can get that footage in many cases (esp where they don't give tickets). And various other excuses. Another manifestation of the American technocratic police state in disguise. But if you're not tech savvy and took the time and trouble, your devices are doing far worse.
If undetectable, who’s ever gonna get caught using the license plate spray?
10:02 ...in a clearly legible condition.
Well technically cameras can't read. Cameras capture images. According to the ad, an officer looking at the plate can read it, so it is legible. An officer may not be able to read letters or numbers in the photo, but the photo isn't the license plate. It's a photo.
I just hate having a toll pass transponder and getting billed thru the transponder (charged directly to my account) AND by mail ( photo of plate) for same toll same date and time. Then wasting my time arguing on the phone about a few dollars of double dipping tolls... Sorry Sir, call E-pass, then after calling E-pass: It is something you are going to have to solve with Sunpass. Transponder was supposed to make life practical. I know it's just a few dollars. It's the Principe
4503.21, A(2) Ohio Revised code just says the same a MI. HOWEVER License plate covers are allowed because you can still see the plate information. Also where I live the courts determined that a third party cannot levy a fine on a private citizen. So the traffic cameras are required to be operated with a LEO next to it. Cameras went away quick.
The problem I have with red light cameras is they are mostly owned and operated by private corp. who split the money with the government. They frequently set the timing for the picture before the legal definition of running a red light takes place.
Our city had them. Then the newspaper published the contract details with the private company. The company was getting $180 of every $200 ticket. There was so much outrage the city took them down.
They mail the owner the ticket. Not the driver.
Yeah, and thats bullshit!
@@laid07 which means you don't have to pay it. Ive not paid a few outside of Austin and nothing ever happened.
Currently , there are millions of people in the streets in Paris and Hong Kong . People are fed up the the whole thing . Soon it will happen here . To paraphrase Johnny Paycheck's song about his job " Take this surveillance society and shove it " .
I wonder if you can hang the plate upside down, it's not obscured and it's horizontal. Also can you put IR bulbs to over expose the plate to cameras and wash it out only to digital cameras?
Now that's an interesting thought.. I wonder if anybody knows or has tried it?
Prove i put the spray on there.. Might have been applied by some teem causing mischief and since I can't see it how was I to know. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Long story short: to "defeat" traffic cameras your plate would have to be unable to be seen by human eyes (like a police officer's), therefore you would be breaking the law by purposely obscuring your license plate in most states. People in my state purposely scuff theirs, and those with old plates (no law here saying you have to replace the plates you've had for 30+ years) can get them to rust a bit. Granted, once you're caught you get a ticket that gives you a specified amount of time to correct the situation (by getting new plates).
Not true. Human eyes cant pick up infrared light and those will obscure pictures
@@hodorneva7762 Except on newer cameras (or physically upgraded ones) that have strong IR filters. A lot of people in larger cities surrounded by toll roads (like Chicago) started using them to go through the EZPass lanes, without having EZPass, to avoid paying tolls. So they are upgrading cameras as funds permit, and some are even working on legislation to ban the IR license plate lights. Which is probably why the manufacturers of these lights are asking people to not use them to avoid paying tolls...
The part that gets me about those traffic cams that give you tickets and goes off of who owns the vehicle is what if someone else was driving the vehicle at the time of the ticket how can the owner fight that ticket?
If a license plate is capable of being read by a human being, say, a police officer, then it would be in compliance. Attorneys are usually the ones that come up with these laws to get passed and are the first to try and defend their stupidity for doing so... None of the laws I know of were built around what a machine can see or what it can't see....
Hmm is the ticket for running the red light more than the ticket for having the plate sprayed? LOL
If it wasn't too costly I buy a can of that stuff and run around spraying everybody's license plate with it. They didn't break the law, they didn't even know it was done.
Steve,
You took a long time getting there.
Kidding or not
Gordon
Ramsey couldn't run a hot dog stand.
Many States require both front and rear license plates. I am 90% sure that California is a state that requires them on both the front and back. If my memory is correct, New York does as well. I believe some States require one on the back, but the front is optional. Florida only issues one plate, and it must be on the rear. I have lived in too many different States...
I saw a picture and article a couple years ago where a guy had installed about 20 license plates on the back of his car so they could not tell which plate was the actual plate for his car. I am sure that is illegal also or maybe he found a loophole in the law.
In Alberta it's illegal to have any other license plates on the vehicle, www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/t06.pdf section 53(1)-b
Plate is property of the state, despite the fact that you have to pay them for it... seems like legal issue there. If they charge you for the plate and still claim ownership.
Maybe you pay a fee to register your vehicle and they give you the plate?
@@barence321 - keep your speculations on the law to yourself. Maybe and might be are useless and just excuses to get attention.
Love your channel, Steve. I especially love your added emphasis in the form of that "Lehto Chuckle". Hee, hee, hee. Great stuff, my man. You're the kind of attorney we cops feel comfortable chit chatting with. Your D.J. background shines through.
🐷
@@petequinones3454, some folks just love bacon. Obviously, you're not one of them.
Thanks so much for taking time to explain in plain English the mumbo
jumbo of the legal system. Love your vids. Please keep it up.
Nothing is illegal till you’re caught. 😁
Best one I've seen is to put high intensity infrared lights all around the license... they just look like a decorative license plate holder. The high levels of IR are sufficient to overexpose the snapshot.
ever seen what happens to basically any digital camera that has a pen laser pointer, flashed directly into the optical lense ?
LOLS end of camera, it's chipset, is not designed to accommodate the intensity and it basically blows out the sensor/collector.... and cheap state paid cameras, lols those damn things, ya, no challenge whatsoever.
I enjoy listening to a professional talk on legal topics! I sold cars and was a disc jockey, too!
I was talking to a local bus driver, and your name came up! Keep up the great job! Have fun!
This channal has come along way since this time 5 years ago. Keep up the good work Lahto!
My main problem with revenue scameras is that they don't serve the primary purpose of enforcement. A traffic stop gets a dangerous driver's attention right then and there amd alerts other driver's to mind their p's and q's.
If all that happens is a picture is taken, then the dangerous driver likely continues the behavior.
MAYBE they'll change their habits weeks later when the ticket arrives, but this is the traffic enforcement equivalent of waiting until Saturday morning to spank your kid for something they did on Monday.
The time to enforce the law is at the time of the infraction. Additionally, what if the reason they ran the light is that they were impaired? That's another missed opportunity to make the roads safer.
But revenue scameras are about generating money, not safety.
_Lehto's Law: That's a Wrap!_
In Australia the redlight cameras also double as speed cameras,and now they can check to see if your car registration is expired.So in one hit you could theoretically get 3 tickets in one flash.That could cost up to $1000 dollars or more depending on your speed.
Great Halloween prank: couple of kids spray the high-end car license plates.
Hey Lehto, I've gotta admit something: I no longer watch your videos for their "legal" content/thoughts/advice, I am now getting very fulfilling entertainment value out of the _COMMENT_ section of your vids. For some reason, your topics seem to attract the *brainless* just like bugs are drawn to a stadium light. There is some really good sh!t down here...LMAO!
This topic is 2 years old and the comments are just as entertaining! I have to agree with you! I still enjoy his legal advice, but damn the comments are hilarious! Yes, I know you will probably never see this comment ... MEH!
I have three infrared LEDs over my license plate. That’s all it takes. And they think it’s for my backup camera.
I disagree Steve. Spraying the license plate with a clear spray obscures the plate in the same manner as a clear coat sprayed on your car's paint obscures the visibility of seeing the color of your car. In both cases, neither the plate nor the color of the car is obscured in any way. On a side note, I hear PAM works well too.
I do think a court would disagree, you added something with the intent to obscure it in one circumstance, I doubt they would just let that slide because it’s not constant.
So how do u prove who owns the automobile to charge them with placing the spray on the plate?
“Horizontal” could allow for upsidedown to be ok
Steve, what about a system that prevented the camera from taking a picture without technically obscuring a plate? Let's assume the cameras don't have infrared filters, if you put a wide angle infrared light on your car such that it flooded any camera's sensor would that be illegal?
+James how complex will we get here? Hard to say on that one.
According to your reading of Michigan's Vehicle Registration Code a license plate must be "clearly visible" and not covered or obscured with foreign substances to remain clearly legible.
The spray or other devices seem to maintain the legibility of the registration plate. Is "legibility" legally analogous to photocopying or photographing? The cameras are electronically recording the vehicle's registration's tags. If law enforcement was directly behind the vehicle could the vehicle's registration tag be legible to the officer?
I said the same thing.
The plate is legible. The law says everything about it's mounting and condition. But legible to whom. And from what distance.
Aircraft are used in many areas too. Should they be able to read it too?
If the law is going into any details. It must list them All I'd say.
Law says nothing about traffic cameras having difficulty reading the plate? As long as it's visible to the tyrants reading it then it should be fine
@@evinsleddervedder6816
Dude. Think BEFORE You Speak.
Those "TYRANTS",.. are the one's who Installed Those Cameras 🤨
@Lukas zzstu Sikorski
And Now We Know Who You Are
I got a speeding ticket that I couldn't fight but somebody must have complained? The sign talking about the LIMIT was only about a yard high off the surface of the ground. I was in the MIDDLE lane and could NOT see it since other vehicles were in the way. Things like that really burn me up.