Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's suspend reality for a moment, and see what would happen in a real Democracy faced with a need for public revenue and an abundance of motor traffic. How would you, and how do you think most people in your community would vote, on Traffic Fines as a source of puiblic revenue?
Assume that all fines are administered and adjudicated exactly as they are now, with no change in police patrol, enforcement or court procedures.
The other option is to raise your taxes. Is it better to at least have a shot at not paying more by being a careful driver or get an unavoidable increase?
Anyway, municipalities are ultimately misguided because of a simple fact of life, illustrated here:
Using traffic fines as a main revenue source would only lead to even more corruption and abuse when it comes to enforcement. Just look at the corruption that comes with it today when a police department depends on the revenue to pay basic bills. Every area has a place infamously known as a speed trap for example, and its usually the most cash strapped. They spend their days writing tickets to people from out of town, rather then doing real police work like solving real crimes.
IMHO, revenue generated by fines should never go directly to the department that generated them. You are just asking for trouble by allowing those department to keep the money.
Cities and towns have discovered a gold mine for revenue. A camera installed on a traffic light. Study after study has shown that almost 90% of revenue raised is from less than 1 second red signal and right turns. And they make millions of dollars.
But ask any politician that installed them about the revenue angle and they say 'It's for your safety'.
Fines should be based on the income of the offender. A fine of $100 is harsh punishment to a fella making minimum wage but meaningless to a guy making big money. In order for monetary punishments to have meaning they must sting the offender and make him fear them.
This would also bring more money in to the punishing authority.
Fines should be based on the income of the offender. A fine of $100 is harsh punishment to a fella making minimum wage but meaningless to a guy making big money. In order for monetary punishments to have meaning they must sting the offender and make him fear them.
This would also bring more money in to the punishing authority.
A fine should be based on the gravity of the offense. The punishment is supposed to fit the crime, not the person's economic status.
A fine should be based on the gravity of the offense. The punishment is supposed to fit the crime, not the person's economic status.
I agree the punishment should be based on the gravity of the crime. But a monetary punishment cannot fit the crime unless the financial position of the offender is taken into account. For instance if the crime is trivial the fine should be trivial. But what's trivial to an offender varies by income. And if the offense is grave the same applies. It's relative.
Scary to read that people believe in punishing based on financial status. I work hard to make so much money that I DON'T feel the string when I'm so unlucky to get caught doing a rolling stop or speeding a little on the freeway. Most revenue generating traffic "crime" is trivial in nature. It needs trivial fines to reflect that. The only thing you achieve by making it hurt even more is more contempt for the law and the police force.
I agree the punishment should be based on the gravity of the crime. But a monetary punishment cannot fit the crime unless the financial position of the offender is taken into account. For instance if the crime is trivial the fine should be trivial. But what's trivial to an offender varies by income. And if the offense is grave the same applies. It's relative.
If you agree that the punishment should be based on the gravity of the crime, then that's all there is to it, and it does not matter how rich or poor the person is. See...what you don't realize is that you are a lot reacher than some of your own neighbors, or even coworkers.
Last edited by RayinAK; 06-08-2013 at 08:23 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
