A real re-vo-lew-shun-ary... Nutjob. You'll note there's no info whatsoever what the fine was for.
Probably contempt of court for ranting at the judge until a bailiff had to ball-gag him.. He'll show up with a Tec9 at your favorite behaviorally-controlled entertainment area someday soon. Rr On 04/26/2017 11:34 PM, jim bell wrote: > > http://www.autoblog.com/2017/04/26/oregon-fines-man-500-for-using-math-to-fight-red-light-cameras/ > > × > > Oregon fines man $500 for using math to challenge red-light cameras > > > It's a free-speech issue. And math is math, Oregon! > > > > Few things in this world are as universally despised as traffic > cameras. After his wife received a ticket for tripping a red-light > camera, Oregon resident Mats Järlström openly criticized the Orwellian > devices and the mathematical formulas these cameras use. It seems Big > Brother doesn't take too kindly to dissenters, as according to the > Institute for Justice > <http://ij.org/press-release/lawsuit-challenges-oregon-law-prohibiting-mathematical-criticism-without-license/> > Järlström > was fined $500 for violating a law that prohibits mathematical > criticism without a license. > > Free speech is a term that's often misconstrued. It's not some blanket > to hide behind while spouting ridicule and hate to anyone and > everyone. In the US, what free speech does protect is the right of a > person to openly criticize the government, as Järlström was doing when > he argued that the equation which governs the traffic light > <http://www.autoblog.com/tag/traffic+light/> timers was out of date. > After being fined, Järlström filed a lawsuit against the ban on > mathematical debate. > > The Institute for Justice says the actual fine was for Järlström > calling himself a "professional engineer." The thing is, Järlström > does have a degree in electrical engineering, though he doesn't carry > a state license. In Oregon's eyes, that doesn't make him a real > engineer. Järlström's initial issue was that the green-yellow-red > progression was too short for lights with a left or right turn. Using > his engineering expertise, he began to criticize the math equation > that governs this timing, hence the fine. > > Järlström and the Institute for Justice claim these licensing boards > violate free speech by fining those who criticize both the boards and > the government agencies behind things like traffic cameras. A lawyer > for the Institute for Justice makes the point that you don't need to > be a licensed lawyer to write an article disagreeing with a Supreme > Court decision. Free speech, whether used to challenge Supreme Court > decisions or traffic cameras, is a fundamental freedom granted by US > Constitution. > > And it's also no stretch to say that using mathematics is a > fundamental human right - part of what actually makes us human. No law > can take away our math. > > [end of quote] > > Jim Bell
