$500 Fine For Criticizing Red Light Cameras

techdirt.com/articles/20170425/14273237238/guy-fined-500-criticizing-government-without-permit-sues-oregon-licensing-board.shtml
by Tim Cushing
Wed, Apr 26th 2017

Guy Fined $500 For Criticizing Government Without A Permit Sues Oregon Licensing Board
from the with-a-special-appearance-by-[STATE-REVENUE-GENERATOR-A] dept

Government entities tend to dislike people who criticize red light cameras. There's little evidence supporting the theory they make driving safer, but there's plenty of data out there showing just how profitable they can be, especially with a little fine tuning.

When someone takes it upon themselves to dig into traffic cameras, they make few friends at city hall. Oregon resident Mats Jarlstrom's interest in red light cameras was piqued like so many others: by receiving a ticket. Unlike some others, Jarlstrom has a background in electronic engineering and the inherent inquisitiveness to follow through on a thorough examination of yellow light timing. He did some math and came to the conclusion the timing was off.

“In his view, the leading mathematical formula for calculating the proper length of yellow lights (dating back to 1959) is incomplete, because it fails to account for how drivers decelerate before making a right-hand turn. Mats’s revised theory addresses that issue; his formula is based on the 1959 model but also factors in the time needed for turning drivers to clear the intersection.”

Jarlstrom's apparent mistake was not keeping these findings to himself. He spoke to local news stations about his research and presented his conclusions to a national conference of transportation engineers. The only entity that didn't want to hear anything about his yellow light research was his local government. He tried to present his findings to the state traffic engineering body but found it less than receptive to new ideas.

cont.

Other urls found in this thread:

object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-index-files/human-freedom-index-2016-update-3.pdf
ncees.org/engineering/pe/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

In response to Jarlstrom's exercise of his First Amendment rights, the Oregon state engineering licensing board opened an investigation. Unsurprisingly, it arrived at the conclusion that it hadn't handed out an engineering license to Jarlstrom. Surprisingly, this effort wasted nearly two years of taxpayer time and money.

“According to the Board, Mats _illegally practiced engineering without a license_ every time he “critique[d]” the existing traffic-light system and shared his ideas with “members of the public.” Even his e-mail to the creator of the original formula was ruled illegal. So was his correspondence with local media.”

Weird. Stupid. But at least the licensing law is narrowly-tailored, right?

“The practice of engineering is defined to cover “any . . . creative work requiring engineering education, training and experience.” And the law is just as sweeping as it sounds. Even the Oregon Attorney General’s Office has admitted that it’s “a broad definition which may have a particular meaning to those persons trained and knowledgeable in engineering but may be unclear to anyone else.”

Having found something to use against a critic of outdated traffic light measuring systems, the Oregon licensing board went all out. It told Jarlstrom he could no longer refer to himself as an "engineer" (despite his BS in electronic engineering). It compiled a list of nine violations and fined him $500.

It also nailed down something else: the starring role of defendant in an upcoming civil rights lawsuit, as the Institute for Justice reports:

“Today he filed a lawsuit against the board in federal court challenging the constitutionality of the state’s requirement that citizens must obtain an engineering license in order to publicly debate anything involving “engineering.”

cont.

IJ points out the board's regulation of speech is not just unconstitutional, it's ridiculous.

“Criticizing the government’s engineering isn’t a crime; it’s a constitutional right,” said Sam Gedge, an attorney at the Institute for Justice, which represents Mats in the lawsuit. “Under the First Amendment, you don’t need to be a licensed lawyer to write an article critical of a Supreme Court decision, you don’t need to be a licensed landscape architect to create a gardening blog, and you don’t need to be a licensed engineer to talk about traffic lights. Whether or not you use math, criticizing the government is a core constitutional right that cannot be hampered by onerous licensing requirements.”

In essence, the Oregon board fined Mats Jarlstrom for doing math and then talking about it. Apparently, no one's allowed to do their own math and speak publicly about it without the express, licensed permission of the state's regulators. While the board is there to prevent non-engineers from harming the public by building faulty bridges and buildings (or, more to the point, fiddling with traffic light timing to drivers' detriment), it shouldn't be able to keep anyone from discussing their own research or referring to their engineering background and expertise.

cont.

Jarlstrom simply wanted his findings to be considered. He had no power to alter traffic light timing or otherwise pose some sort of safety risk to Oregon drivers. And yet, the licensing board subjected him to a lengthy investigation and told him what he could and couldn't discuss publicly. Apparently certain topics of discussion are off limits to the general public unless the government ok's it through a very long and expensive process.

Like many government things, the underlying concept is good, but the execution is horrible. And, in this case, the government was less concerned with the safety of the public than with shutting up a critic poking holes in long-held government theories.

FIN

So car guys don't care about freedom of speech?

>2017
>not driving a self driving car
>driving a vehicle with a internal combustion

...

Say it with me.

LAND OF THE FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.

Ironically here in Aus I got done for a red light camera, took it court, made them prove the camera had be been properly calibrated within the required time period in relation to my infringement, they couldn't provide the required documents, no fine, no court fees, everything went better than expected.

>doing math without a permit is illegal
Literally what

It's perfectly legal to say "I have a degree in engineering" or "I'm an engineering graduate" but calling yourself an "engineer" in that context suggests that you're a licenced professional engineer.

No, having a degree in engineering makes you and engineer but even without a degree, Americans are free to talk about whatever the fuck they want and the government can’t stop them.

>be american
>Get fined for doing maths
>Cant import a car
>No kinder eggs
>Wear shoes inside
>Have to obey curfews
>shart in mart

>Be you
>Tripfag

Im a namefag you idiot

Saying "I'm an engineer" in regards to an engineering problem because you have an engineering degree is the same as saying "I'm a doctor" when discussing a medical problem just because you have an MD.

only in Donald Trump's America..

Not really. Besides, he's an electronic engineer. What kind of engineer do you think builds traffic lights?

How is that different? A BSc in Engineering doesn't make you an engineer any more than an MD makes you a physician.

>Study for 4 years in an accredited engineering course
>Get your degree
>Lol, ur not an engineer

>Be you
>Namefagging even though it isn't necessary
>Being a disgusting europoor
>Being able to own only 1L bikes without the government REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEing about displacement

No, you're not.

When I graduate, it'll be illegal for me to represent myself as an "engineer" until I become a PEng.

>American'ts

They're obviously just trying to fuck him over, but if he did really try to represent himself to the public as an engineer without a license then that is illegal and he should know better than to do that.

>However, it is important to make a distinction between a "graduate engineer" and a "professional engineer" or "licensed engineer." A "graduate engineer" is anyone holding a degree in engineering from an accredited four-year university program, but is not licensed to practice or offer services to the public. Unlicensed engineers usually work as employees for a company, or as professors in engineering colleges, where they are governed under the industrial exemption clause. Some states, such as Ohio and New Jersey, prohibit the use of the term "engineer" by an unlicensed person unless it is part of the internal classification of their employer.

>Europoor
Wrong

>Being able to own literbikes
You dumb american, the meme is 1liter shitboxes, and not being allowed to own literbikes

...

>However,

None of that shit matters, as the 1st Amendment guarantees Americans can talk about whatever the fuck they want whenever the fuck they want.

Wow such bullish.

Land of the free.

object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-index-files/human-freedom-index-2016-update-3.pdf

You can call yourself an engineer all you want to your buddies, but when you start representing yourself as one to the public things get tricky. You can't call yourself a doctor or a lawyer without the proper accreditation, and engineers are no different.

And so, the american delusion of being free vanished away...

>live in communist state
>complain when government shits on you

You can present yourself as whatever you want, it's the other party's responsibility to verify your credentials before listening to you.

Next you're going to tell me I'm not an engineer despite having a job as a Custodial Engineer.

>it's the other party's responsibility to verify your credentials before listening to you
The law says otherwise, faggot. Why do you hate protecting the consumer?

Professional certification is entirely optional in the first world, requiring registration is simply a way to stealth tax people used by oppressive regimes.

seems like this goyem had too much to think

Prove it.

Also "protecting the consumer"? Again if they're just going to go along with someone saying trust me without proving anything then they deserve to get scammed.

>Statanic

>Satanic

Thats the correct name???

>satanic

E D G Y
D
G
Y

>You can't say that, it might confuse someone, they'll think the god-state sanctioned your engineering magic! it's like harry potter, you can't use magic until you graduate from hogwarts!
>but
>you can get this engineering certificate for ten low, low, low payments of 59.99
>sideffectsmayincludeswolleneyeballsautismdownssyndromedeathfallinginlovewithumisonodafromloveliveunironicallyesspecificallyumiwedontknowhowthatoneworksnochihayaisnotanoptionanywayssideffectsmayalsoincludelegatrophysublingualnecrosisprostatemetamorphosisbylisteningtothisadyouagreetoalltermsandconditionsavailablebymailondemandpleasewaitsixtoeightweeksfordeliverythiscontractcannotbenullifiedorexitedforthenexttenyears but wait there's MORE! buy a second one and you'll get a second one for the price of a second one!

America.

What sort of testing is required for the "professional" certification from the state?

>Land of the free.
>object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-index-files/human-freedom-index-2016-update-3.pdf

Freedom is not automatic despite laws. You still have to defend your rights. This problem has recurred many times in American history through court cases that went as high as the usa supreme court.

However, the state of oregon does have a case even though it was morally wrong to try to shut up the critic using a technicality. The first amendment is subject to certain limitations. One cannot legally slander as there is a fine for that. Certain professions have legal protections so that you cannot state in public you are a medical doctor unless you do have an accredited professional medical doctor certification. The same with lawyers. And the same with engineers which has the P.E. certification. That's why for court cases, expert engineering opinions are provided by P.E. engineers as opposed to non-accredited engineers who graduated from a BSEE level education set of courses from an accredited university.

>What sort of testing is required for the "professional" certification from the state?

What sort of testing is required for the "professional" certification from the state?

You are also free to have your land seized by the government to build a wall.

>you literally can not use a colloquialism as simple as "engineer" because you're "misrepresenting" PE certified engineers

I don't think that's a very reasonable limitation.

>i work for boeing, i'm an engineer, and here are my thoughts on speed limits
>SLANDER! SLAAAAAAAAAANDER AND LIES! YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO GIVE ADVICE IN COURT! *throws cowboy hat down* RESPECT THE LAW YA VARMINT *shoots revolvers into the air* GOSH DARN COW LICKIN KITTY NICKIN MRMRMRMR

ncees.org/engineering/pe/

Literally one second in google for "professional engineer exam".

The certification comes from the academic institution the engineer, doctor or lawyer graduated from this is a licence, a simple restriction of free trade.

>Again if they're just going to go along with someone saying trust me without proving anything then they deserve to get scammed.
>people don't falsify their credentials

If misrepresenting yourself isn't a crime, than neither is making elaborate fake documents.
>but that's fraud and already illegal!
So is pretending to be something you're not, bitch.

>Open book
>multiple-choice questions
>Anything other than a Tax on trade.

>he thinks just because it's open book anyone can pass it
>he doesn't think 40 questions in 4 hours isn't full of shitloads of math

It's open book because actual engineers on the job would have access to that stuff. It's testing that you understand your field, not rote memorization. If you haven't undertaken the training and education in the field you're testing in, having the textbook right in front of you isn't going to do shit for you.

>land of the free!
>yuropoor commies are cucked by their gov

There is a strict difference between "i am an engineer" and "i am a PE certified engineer". One is slang. The other is fraud.

But not in the eyes of oregon courts, apparently. For them, it's >implying.

And that's only one of five charges.

Oregon is going to be BTFO in court.

kek

I love how people instead of criticizing this obvious violation of freedom are deperately trying to prove how you can't call yourself an engineer after 4 year of uni.
Totally getting the point, you lots.

Even if he couldn't call himself that you should still taking into account the correctness (or not) of the evidence he presented.

Is that a murican thing or is it like that in yurop too? just wondering

You know, my job title is assembly engineer

But im not an engineer

>be american
>graduate in engineering
>partying with friends at a local
>"finally I've become an engineer guyz!!11!"
>suddenly the SWAT breaks into the place and pushes you on the ground
>"you're being apprehended for being a huge liar kiddo"
>the american was never to be seen again from his family or anyone else

Don't stand a fucking chance in Brisbane though. they pull over every skyline supra. I bought a n15 to try stay under the radar but with cop vans and trailers on every fucking corner and behind every bridge pillar they've killed the car scene here.

>graduated as mechanical engineer
>working as engineer
>not allowed to call myself "engineer"
wew maybe I should look for that letter they sent me after graduation a few years ago, it said something about an engineering title

If the MD and Law ones are like that I may as well go and get registered as both, if I can't find the answers to 6 questions per hour in an open book situation then I shouldn't be allowed to breath never mind practice any of these professions.

>math
maths you illiterate colonist.

You have clearly never sat a TUV engineering exam if you think 40 multiple choice questions in 4 hours is anything other than a doddle.

There are a few states that allow anyone to take the bar. I think California is one of them. If you want to give it a shot, go right ahead. But the people off the street don't have a good track record of passing.

Doctors have a shitload other certifications and tests and other assorted things needed to get their license, however. Good luck getting an internship or a residency just walking off the street.

>engineer talking about how easy their test is
And if some random Veeky Forumstist busrider who was "to smart too graduate high school" were to try?

God I hate europeans.. It depends entirely on the questions how much time it takes. The "difficulty" is irrelevant only the depth matters. Doing diagrams for complex structures with multiple loads takes time not IQ you pretentious fuckwit.

>>live in communist state
>>complain when government

Like the traditionally heavily left wing state of Texas that has started issuing land seizure orders all along the southern boarder. Offering just $2350 per acre as compensation.

What's stopping someone from getting a gun with a long scope range and taking out the camera from a considerable distance?

Won't they get tired of repairing it?

>The "difficulty" is irrelevant
Only an american would be that dumb.

Genuinely curious, is this the second coming of Fuck You're Supra? Because I'm a fan.

>wear shoes inside
wot

I hope he takes this fucking counter suit as far as he can and the law gets changed. That's fucking ridiculous.

Some people do, some people don't.

>You can call yourself an engineer all you want to your buddies, but when you start representing yourself as one to the public things get tricky. You can't call yourself a doctor or a lawyer without the proper accreditation, and engineers are no different.

At the same time, the politicians who fined this guy said he was breaking the law. Under these same guidelines, anyone saying that is talking about law and may not be a lawyer. Hence, then should also be fined.

They won't change the protected title laws.

This is law from Canada where every province has "Professional Engineer" as a protected title. No idea if his law is the same can't be fucked to check but essentially: representing yourself as a licenced engineer, whether by implying it or using the title, is illegal if you are not licenced. However, you can call yourself an X Engineer so long as you don't imply you are licenced, don't provide services to the public, and some other random bits.

If this guy never said he was a PEng, never provided services to the public, and never claimed or implied he was licenced then (assuming the laws are similar) he'll win. The city just wanted to discredit him by showing he wasn't really an engineer, but it's going to backfire. Hard.

What is it like to be so inbred that you add S to words that don't need to be pluralized? What is it like to have such poor national identity, that you need to speak goofy in order to feel different?

>made in Canada by immigrants

So do you say mathematics or mathematic? Lmao

Do you take a science course or a sciences course?

Do you take a computer course or a computers course?

Do you take a dick sucking course or a dick suckings course?

English isn't consistent. Deal with it.

Also mathematics is both singular and plural. Shortening it would be "math" for either singular or plural. You don't remove the "ematic" but keep the S.

Or "maphs" if you're a bong

it depends highly where you are.
Engineer and tech are rather interchangeable in the UK, which has no real forcible requirement for a professional accreditation, though it does have more of a /fraternal order/ of engineering regulating body which is nice to have, but not a requirement to practice.

In the USA, if you work in engineering, you may call yourself an engineer. BUT only PE's can sign off an stamp work for approval, which are licensed oddly through an entirely private organization that seems contradictory a lot of the time if you read their monthly news letters.

This guy did not create, construct, implement, or do anything that is a danger to the common good. He is not in violation of any of the canons of engineering, and is arguably looking out for the common good, which is the fundamental basis of the canons. It not illegal to contact people with your ideas, its not illegal to study, design, or ideate on changing things. You can design and draft up death rays in your garage, legally. The only way this would be illegal is IF he is designing, then saying these timing systems are safe, AND then installing them onto traffic light control boxes. ALSO almost all DOT's in the USA as well as the aashto standards (read suggestions) KNOW that mean yellow timing is not sufficient, they account for this mostly with all-red timing up to 3 seconds to allow all cars to clear the intersection before the next direction is given the green.

What it boils down to is IF the local government reverses their decisions to use this timing system, then they are calling every single red-light ticket, and every single red light accident into question and can be liable for any wrongdoings found. They are making money currently off the system, and don't want to lose a revenue stream that basically you cannot argue against in court of law in the USA.

It's an interesting legal challenge, but really fucking dumb and bureaucratic. They could have ignored the letter or acknowledged it but said he's wrong. Instead by going for the "Letter of the law" and issuing him a fine it makes them seem petty and vindictive against someone trying to serve the public interest. I think the state will prevail on the claim of the use of the word "engineer" but who knows.

he actually claimed to be an engineer and took on a public saftey engineering project
then filed a public report saying traffic lights were unsafe because their operational life was too short and that creates a hazard

he needs to be licensed as an engineer if he is going to make such a bold claim

He said accreditation, not registration, you stupid cunt.

Wow you are butthurt over nothing aren't you. They are accredited already by the university what he is talking about is registration the fact both of you are wrong isn't 's fault

>English isn't consistent. Deal with it.
If you are going to culturally appropriate another language get it right or fuck off and make your own from scratch.

In relation to the time vs amount of questions obviously you retard.

>In the USA, if you work in engineering, you may call yourself an engineer.

Depends on whether your state has an industrial exemption in its licensing laws. If so, a company may employ anyone as an 'engineer' if their duties are restricted to working on that companies products. In other states, a license is still required.

>BUT only PE's can sign off an stamp work for approval,

And provide engineering services for hire. That creates a gray area in that I must have a PE to create a design for hire for a client. But as an employee in a state with an industrial exemption, no license is required. States are (slowly) moving to remove this exemption. Which means licenses for everyone. Or at least the engineers supervising projects.

>which are licensed oddly through an entirely private organization that seems contradictory a lot of the time if you read their monthly news letters.

Not private. It's an administrative department of each state. Granted, the tests and rules are authored by a private organization. But they are adopted (and in some cases amended) by state laws.

>You can call yourself an engineer all you want to your buddies, but when you start representing yourself as one to the public things get tricky.

Unless you're representing yourself as a _working_ engineer on that particular project, ANY American is free to expound on anything and everything whenever the fuck they please.

I can claim to be an engineer even if I'm not and babble on about bridge construction or whatever and there is absolutely nothing the government can do about it (unless they want to get sued).

And Oregon is going to get sued by this guy and they'll settle before they ever get to court, as they don't want to piss away the money on lawyers just to lose the case, as they'd inevitably would.

>This guy did not create, construct, implement, or do anything that is a danger to the common good.

That's arguable. An opinion piece in the local paper? You could say pretty much anything you wanted and be protected by the First Amendment. Once this goes to court (even a chicken-shit traffic court) misrepresenting ones self as an engineer can be an administrative violation. And a $500 fine could be cheap.

I'm not American

Talking about the law is different from giving legal advice, which only lawyers can do

>And so, the american delusion of being free vanished away...

Better be careful, Eurobro, that sounds a lot like “hate speech” to me and that’ll get you shipped off to the gulag right quick.

>They won't change the protected title laws.

This has nothing to do with protected titles like engineer or doctor, this is a straight-up free speech issue that Oregon is going to lose (and thus they'll settle out of court).

>in large urban areas so gotta get WAY THE DUCK AWAY and shoot illegally
>wind is bad today
>oops that's murder