Muscatine

So Logic, do you see where your statement is incorrect? Quote from your post: "Iowa law requires the driver of a motor vehicle to be in compliance with the law, it does not extend to the owner of the vehicle".

Only to the point of the owner knowingly allowing the operation illegally.

As stated in the code and your situation the owner knew the vehicle was being operated illegally.

As stated in my situation and with these cameras the owner does not knowingly allow illegal operation.

So NOW you wish to look deeper at the legality rather than make blanket statements. OK.

That's the whole point, logic. These stop light charges will not be filed under state code and state code is not a defense to these stop light charges.  They will be filed under a contrived city ordinance that makes the owner responsible regardless. This will have nothing to do with state code. Your "argument" has no bearing on this matter under the auspices of state law, which is why your initial statement to that fact is incorrect. Its two different things. Unfortunately, the Ia Supreme Court has not ruled on the exact issue on this; only some surrounding issues that they have voted and ruled to support.

(Quote: "Iowa law requires the driver of a motor vehicle to be in compliance with the law, it does not extend to the owner of the vehicle".) As I have shown by my own personal history, your statement is inherently incorrect. It absolutely extends to the owner.

"As I have shown by my own personal history, your statement is inherently incorrect. It absolutely extends to the owner."

Again, only to the degree of KNOWINGLY allowing illegal operation.