What happened to presumption of innocence?

Wayne R. Miller, Las Vegas

Wednesday, Feb. 16, 2011 | 2:03 a.m.

Regarding Brad Kuhns’ Sunday letter to the editor, headlined “Cameras save lives without invading privacy”:

Mr. Kuhns says red-light cameras are a win-win situation. There is no doubt that these cameras have and do save lives and other related things. But let’s not forget one important issue: the constitutionally protected presumption of innocence.

The vehicles my wife and I own are titled and registered in both of our names. If a red-light camera were to take a picture of just the license plate and vehicle, as Mr. Kuhns suggested, it would not disclose who was driving.

That would mean whoever got the ticket would need to “prove their innocence” instead of requiring the state to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. And what about friends or family visiting and driving one of our vehicles? Hopefully, they would own up to a violation, but they also have a presumption of innocence.

Safety for other drivers should be a top priority for all of us. Unfortunately, many drivers believe that getting to their destinations as fast as possible is more important.

It is not unreasonable to ask our citizens to obey traffic laws; it is unreasonable to ask us to give up our constitutional rights.