Missouri Publisher of the Columbia Tribune Henry J. Waters the Third is incensed and frustrated. Missouri legislators like Senator Jim Lembke and Representative Paul Wieland, and tea parties throughout the state are opposing red light cameras because they deprive citizens of their due process rights and circumvent state statute as well.

For example, one of the main problem with red light camera ordinances is that they illegally re-classify running a red light as a NON-moving violation, so they can treat the issue like a parking ticket. This allows an assumption that the driver and owner are the same, thereby switching the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defendant. In many municipalities, running a red light is designated as “parking in the middle of an intersection,” in order to avoid the fairness of a criminal trial and more easily extract funds from defendants. There are a host of other issues, too, such as the manner in which the violations are served. Short story is the municipalities are committing mail fraud and extortion.

Henry J. Waters the Third’s response? Who cares what the law says! Trashing due process rights is a more expedient means of law enforcement.

“Sen. Jim Lembke leads a fight in the Missouri Senate over the constitutionality of red-light cameras, alleging everything from mail fraud to racketeering to lack of due process to violation of the state Hancock Amendment…

Why make this so hard? … Levying fines against vehicle owners instead of struggling with driver ID would probably constitute even better enforcement because violations could be more quickly, accurately and universally charged.

Red-light cameras work. Identifying drivers is not necessary. The General Assembly could rationalize the use and enforcement of red-light cameras by making violations something other than “moving.” If “non-moving” offends their sense of semantic tidiness, let lawmakers make up a new word. Semantics is not the issue. Easy, proper use of the cameras is.”

In other words, to hell with the Constitution, cameras are efficient. What me worry?

(more…)

Here in just around four minutes is a complete refresher course on the history, meaning and importance of the United States Constitution for all you young dudes and dudettes:

All right, it’s complete nonsense.  Still, when you man and woman the barricades, at least now you’ll know what you’re fighting for!  Sort of.

The brilliant and patriotic backgrounds are by Justin Folk, who actually wore a white wig to get in the mood. As opposed to his pink one… which I think is for a different mood.

The Citizens United decision is a powerful rebuke to the forces that believe our Constitution is less a solid foundation of our democracy then a political pretzel to be bent and twisted into any form the politicians choose.  Sadly, far too many journalists and other people who really should know better blindly accept this bizarre vision of our founding documents.  They allow themselves to be seduced by the notion that the foundations of our democracy are actually barriers to “progress” that can simply wished away instead of firm principles that, if they are to be changed at all, can be amended only with the overwhelming and express consent of the governed.

The Left often argues that the Constitution is a “living” document, by which they really mean that the plain text is irrelevant and that over time the Constitution’s provisions inevitably morph into – surprise – something that just happens to correspond exactly to their precise policy preferences.  And so the “Living Constitution” grows, but less like a mighty oak than a patch of weeds.  Take the Commerce Clause, originally drafted to allow the federal government to control trade between the states but today a bloated behemoth that provides an excuse for every Congressional power grab that comes down the pike — including, if Nancy Pelosi is to be believed, “health care reform.” (more…)