This scheme would reduce ticket revenue, though. And if criminal scofflaws have to pay, good, fuck 'em. The New York taxpayers shouldn’t take on the burden. The scumbags could avoid the cost trivially.
But it would be offset by the massive and recurring income from installing and maintaining the devices by a third party.
Let’s see who the companies providing these services are owned by.
Like when ticket cameras in vans became a thing 25 years ago: 80% of the “ticket” went to the camera van company. I say “ticket” because in many US jurisdictions only a police officer can issue a ticket, so these were unenforceable as tickets.
States had to update their laws to add “civil fees” as a thing just for such cameras.
This scheme would reduce ticket revenue, though. And if criminal scofflaws have to pay, good, fuck 'em. The New York taxpayers shouldn’t take on the burden. The scumbags could avoid the cost trivially.
But it would be offset by the massive and recurring income from installing and maintaining the devices by a third party.
Let’s see who the companies providing these services are owned by.
Like when ticket cameras in vans became a thing 25 years ago: 80% of the “ticket” went to the camera van company. I say “ticket” because in many US jurisdictions only a police officer can issue a ticket, so these were unenforceable as tickets.
States had to update their laws to add “civil fees” as a thing just for such cameras.
Oh, my heavens, a THIRD PARTY! /s
Yes, these devices cost money to produce, install, and operate. Don’t want to pay for one? Stop breaking the law.