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.
Rich speeder had to pay a $103,000 ticket fine. The high amount was because he was rich.
No effing thank you. The police can check your income on the spot?
The abuses by govt would be over the top. It would be used as a corrupt revenue generating stream for sure.
Of course the progressives at The Atlantic love it:
"Outrage among the rich—especially nonsensical, safari-invoking outrage—might be a sign that something fair is at work....."
How about a mandated fund, that is a tax on all of the progressives (and only the progressives) in the city/county/state where the traffic violation occured, and the low income violator can then bill them directly for his/her subsidy on the fine? That would go right along with everybody's beliefs, the lower income violater gets subsidized, every body is happy, right?
Last edited by snebarekim; 03-18-2018 at 10:58 AM..
"For a justice system committed to treating like offenders alike, scaling fines to income is a matter of basic fairness. Making everyone pay the same sticker price is evenhanded on the surface, but only if you ignore the consequences of a fine on the life of the person paying. The flat fine threatens poor people with financial ruin while letting rich people break the law without meaningful repercussions. Equity requires punishment that is equally felt."
The punishment is supposed to fit the crime not the criminal.
Really - judges often have discretion over sentences or whether to allow community service or house arrest or all kinds of otherwise "creative sentencing" - SPECIFICALLY to make the punshishment fit the crime - and income can easily be one of those aspects. Here is just one award-winning judge:
Really - judges often have discretion over sentences or whether to allow community service or house arrest or all kinds of otherwise "creative sentencing" - SPECIFICALLY to make the punshishment fit the crime - and income can easily be one of those aspects. Here is just one award-winning judge:
In general, yes, but for traffic fines, not so much. Evcen if much of the fine is waived there's still a state surcharge, at least in NY, that the judge has no power over.
Government should NEVER be using so-called "public safety" regulations to GENERATE REVENUE!
First, it makes cops nothing but highway robbers, who rob more than you would ever carry around in cash.
As local governments endlessly look for more money, it leads to ridiculous "traps" and extra-low limits, so that virtually everyone who drives is subject to the bad luck of having a cop lying in wait--and preying on people going to and from work is particularly disgusting. It makes EVERYONE a law-breaker, and therefore creates a distain for the law and the government (not that we need any more incentive for that).
The other thing is that the police always handing out traffic tickets, and never have time to investigate when our homes and/or cars are robbed. I've had houses robbed twice, and a car stolen once--the cops never lifted a finger to investigate any of these crimes, and wouldn't even drive me home when my car was stolen at the mall (cost me a small fortune for a taxi when I was poor as a church mouse).
If there's a safety issue, send the drivers to jail. But governments should NEVER be allowed to act as highway robbers, particularly after they've confiscated about half of the economy already.
Government should NEVER be using so-called "public safety" regulations to GENERATE REVENUE!
But if the progressive scale was implemented like they do in Scandanavia in some areas, the local governmentts would go out of their ever lovin minds to grab from a piggy bank of wealthier folks paying much higher rates (because social justice!) and this would exacerbate the problem far worse than it is now.
They do it in poorer areas when they can get away with it too, like Pagedale, Missouri:
Government should NEVER be using so-called "public safety" regulations to GENERATE REVENUE!
First, it makes cops nothing but highway robbers, who rob more than you would ever carry around in cash.
As local governments endlessly look for more money, it leads to ridiculous "traps" and extra-low limits, so that virtually everyone who drives is subject to the bad luck of having a cop lying in wait--and preying on people going to and from work is particularly disgusting. It makes EVERYONE a law-breaker, and therefore creates a distain for the law and the government (not that we need any more incentive for that).
The other thing is that the police always handing out traffic tickets, and never have time to investigate when our homes and/or cars are robbed. I've had houses robbed twice, and a car stolen once--the cops never lifted a finger to investigate any of these crimes, and wouldn't even drive me home when my car was stolen at the mall (cost me a small fortune for a taxi when I was poor as a church mouse).
If there's a safety issue, send the drivers to jail. But governments should NEVER be allowed to act as highway robbers, particularly after they've confiscated about half of the economy already.
This is a subject on which I often post so I totally agree with you. See these thread:
The focus on protests about speed limits have been about superhighways. Agitation against National 55 succeeded. Little attention has been paid to local secondary roads, typically set at 25, 30 or 35 where 40 or 45 would be appropriate. Also texting laws are big revenue raisers. Talking on a hand-held cell or changing a song are now "texting" and subject to huge fines and five points.
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.
