Around the pulse
The Balance
By - April 1, 2005 | Email the author

Here in the Nation’s Capital we are often the guinea pigs of policy. A Congressman or Senator will offer up an idea, get some sort of gauge of the local reaction, see if it pisses off either Maryland or Virginia (two very different ideological states) and then go forward with it. Inside the District policy gets a little different vetting. DC is a fairly homogenous political city where residents tend to vote Democrat regardless of views, managerial ability or criminal record. But where policies that go into effect in neighboring states rarely affect the District, policies in the District can have profound consequences for residents of neighboring states. Take for example the new stadium going up to house the Nationals. The public portion of the funding will come from a tax on gross receipts from businesses. This was an idea supported by the business community because they believe that the stadium will in fact generate more revenue. Why do they believe this when the model has failed so many times for other stadiums? Because in DC, unlike Baltimore, Chicago and so many other cities, most of the fans who will attend games do not live in the same state as their team. Whereas dollars in Chicago are spent by people who live in Illinois and would have spent those dollars in Illinois with or without a stadium, it will be Maryland and Virginia dollars spent in DC that otherwise would have been spent in Maryland and Virginia. In this case a decision by the DC City Council to approve the stadium will be publicly funded, and not by the constituents of the DC City Council but by residents of other states who have no say in DC politics.

While that might be the highest profile effect that the DC City Council has on its neighbors it is certainly not the only example. Last July the District banned cell phone use in cars by drivers. A driver may only use a cell phone if connected to a headset. Otherwise, picking up the phone and talking is an offense that brings a ticket and fine. DC is of course not the first place not to take such a step. New York’s smoking ban is complemented by a cell phone ban while driving. But DC has not stopped there. Starting early in March, the District set up several speed cameras at intersections throughout the city limits. These speed cameras are in addition to red light cameras that are already located all throughout DC. The way the cameras work is simple. The camera is hooked into the traffic light system. If you cross into the intersection after a light has turned red it triggers the camera, which in turn takes a picture of your car and license plate. The picture is sent back to the police, who look up your address and mail you a ticket that essentially cannot be challenged because there is a picture of your plate. The speed cameras work in nearly the same manner. Each camera has a radar device attached to it. If your car is clocked on radar going above the posted speed limit the camera is activated, a picture of your car is taken and mailed to the police along with your speed when the camera snapped. The police then mail you a ticket.

This is part of a growing trend throughout the country where technology is being used to better enable law enforcement to, well, enforce the laws. And as a nation we often applaud this technology. When a listening device allows an FBI agent to hear a phone conversation and break up an arms shipment we’re all happy. After all, they busted the bad guy, prevented a scene from Team America from taking place and everyone is happy. That’s what bad guys are supposed to get. But we take issue when some of the same technology is turned back against us.

Very few of us believe that we are in fact bad people, much less criminals. I would wager that every single person reading this column has broken the law in the past 7 days. Perhaps you failed to turn on your lights while it was raining. Perhaps you were doing 58 in a 55. Perhaps you performed oral copulation in a state where the law clearly prohibits extra-marital relations and only allows for missionary within those marital relations. It doesn’t particularly matter what it was, or what law was broken. The fact remains that behavior contrary to the written law is by definition criminal.

However, there is an accepted difference in our society between illegal and wrong. That which is illegal is not always wrong and that which is wrong may in fact be perfectly legal. The catch is that the Government is supposed to demonstrate some compelling interest to the protection of society before passing a law restricting individual freedoms. That is the reasoning behind striking down laws that prohibit acts such as sodomy. The idea is that what is done by two consenting adults in the privacy of their own home does not harm society; therefore the Government has no interest in regulating the behavior. (Actually, there are several ideas that go behind such rulings, such as equal application of the law amongst all citizens and the inability to present probable cause to prevent such behavior, but those don’t fit with the point of the column, so while I’ll recognize them here, along with the point of view that such rulings are totally misapplied, that’s about the end of them for my purposes today) In the case of traffic violations the argument is that a person places others in danger when operating his or vehicle in an unsafe manner, therefore some restrictions must be placed on the way that vehicles are driven. This is a widely accepted practice. Very few people argue that the speed limit on a highway represents the government overstepping its boundaries. Very few people argue that placing a light at an intersection to control the flow of traffic is an unnecessary form of government control. And when we get pulled over for running a red light or for doing 75 in a 55 we’re often upset, but very rarely do we challenge the authority of the police to stop and ticket us.

Things change for some reason when you talk cameras. Many argue that red light cameras and speed cameras are an unnecessary intrusion into their privacy. What interest does the government have in photographing us in our cars? Aren’t the cameras unreliable? How could the police possibly know who was driving the car? Shouldn’t they need more proof to issue a ticket?

There is a balance to be maintained between the technology and what we consider to be our personal freedoms. I myself have been often guilty of saying aloud “don’t the police have anything better to do than pull me over for going to fast down an empty road? Don’t they have any crimes to solve?” Well, thanks to technology, they’re not wasting as much time pulling people over. They’re not causing traffic due to rubbernecking to see what Super-Criminal was pulled over in his beige 1992 Daihatsu on the beltway. There are real, tangible benefits to the technology. And there are some justifications as well. Face it – running a red light is illegal. You would never burn through a red light if you saw a cop sitting on the corner. Speeding is illegal. You wouldn’t gun the accelerator upwards of 90 if you knew a cop was sitting around the corner. It’s generally accepted that these practices are against the law and that there are consequences. So does it matter if you get busted by a camera or by a cop? Especially when speeding? The cop will be using his radar gun to figure out how fast your were going. So will the camera. Does it really matter if you get the ticket written out for you on the spot or if you get it in the mail a few days later?

You’re probably expecting me to answer that question right here. Well, I’m not. I don’t think I’ve made up my own mind yet. What is the balance between the need to enforce the law more efficiently and the need to ensure that technology is not used to violate our personal freedoms? Do traffic cameras cross the line? Do facial scanners at airport? Laser microphones? Is there a line at all? I’d love to hear what you think. Just be careful not to fly through that intersection on the way to tell me…

Last 5 posts by

Related Posts
POP!
TNA
Strikeforce
Dana White

Comments are closed.

Check This Out!
Authors
moodspins - moodspins

Part of the Inside Pulse network copyright 2004-2009. Inside Pulse is proudly powered by Wordpress. Inside Pulse also uses and recommends the following technologies - Blubrry Power Press for Streaming Audio Podcasts and streaming video.