Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:05 AM
bump bump is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,270
Why do people confuse the original offense with non-compliance follow on penalties?

After keeping up with the news recently, it seems that a huge chunk of the population has some kind of fundamental logical disconnect between people who commit an original offense of some sort, and any follow-on penalties for not actually complying with the requirements of that first offense, be it coming to court, paying a fine, etc...

Hypothetical example:

Person gets repeated speeding tickets. Person fails to pay tickets OR show up to court on the appointed days. Warrant is made for person's arrest. Person gets arrested, loses job due to unauthorized absence from work.

People start crying and getting angry because "Person lost job because of PARKING TICKETS! How is this just?" Et-cetera, ad nauseam.

WTF? They weren't hauled to jail because of their parking tickets. They were hauled into jail because they refused to pay them or to show up to court. It's a totally separate second offense.

Then if you explain it, the same people start frothing about how having to you know, actually PAY a speeding ticket or actually show up to court is somehow intolerably onerous.

So I ask, what is the court system to do exactly? Let people opt out of penalties and court dates? Most places let people set up payment plans for that kind of thing already.
  #2  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:14 AM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus Icarus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 4,821
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...d.php?t=861329

There is a debate that recognizes that paying money for an offense is an unnecessary burden on people who do not have money.
__________________
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
- C. Darwin
  #3  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:18 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 34,151
They say that because that's what it amounts to. Look at the studies of the justice system in Ferguson, Missouri. Local government was being funded by an oppressive police state, handing out tickets for petty or trumped up actions, such as walking in the wrong place.

People didn't pay fines or failed to show up to court because they were largely unable to afford the fines, or unable to afford time off to go to court, or didn't have transportation to go to court, or decided it was futile because the system was stacked against them.

What it amounted to was a system that punished you for being poor, and piling on penalty after penalty resulting from that.

It reveals a fundamentally unjust system. And it starts with the petty ticket issued at the start. That's why people say it's all because of the ticket. All the rest wouldn't have happened without it.

As to what you do, when you have this fundamental failure in the justice system, you seek to correct it at a fundamental level. You don't just throw up your hands and continue to impose harsher and harsher penalties on the people trapped in the system. It's futile, and it accomplishes nothing but ruin people's lives.
  #4  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:24 AM
bump bump is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,270
I'm not talking about bail though; it's the conflation of separate penalties that confuses me.

And I get the idea that fines are more onerous to people with less money, but barring some kind of income-based penalty scheme, how would relatively trivial misdemeanors like traffic tickets be punished? Legal penalties are not supposed to be comfortable, after all.
  #5  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:30 AM
steronz steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
And I get the idea that fines are more onerous to people with less money, but barring some kind of income-based penalty scheme, how would relatively trivial misdemeanors like traffic tickets be punished? Legal penalties are not supposed to be comfortable, after all.
Policy debates in this country tend to have people talking past each other, because some like to focus on the individual and some like to focus on the overall effect of a policy.

On an individual level, we all live in the system and its our own responsibility to understand the system and to abide by it, and people who get caught up in cascading fines for non-compliance generally have made a series of poor decisions to get to that point.

On a policy level, if your system is ruining peoples' lives for minor infractions, well, like Ascenray said, it doesn't seem right to just throw your hands up in the air and do nothing. The intent of parking tickets isn't to ruin lives, so if that's ultimately what's happening, then maybe there's a bad policy or two in there somewhere.
  #6  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:32 AM
bump bump is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,270
A little bit of background- the news story that brought this to mind was one where a woman had a large number of outstanding speeding tickets- so many that they issued a bench warrant for her arrest. She got hauled into jail in some podunk Nevada town, whereupon she had some kind of drug-withdrawal related seizures and issues, and the podunk deputies handled it abysmally, and she died.

Of course, the offenderati on Reddit are howling about "She died for SPEEDING TICKETS!" when in fact, she disregarded the whole legal system to the point where they issued a warrant for her arrest, and that's why she was in jail in the first place, after being pulled over for speeding yet again. For the record, the woman was not poor, and she was white.

I'm not defending the jailers here- they failed in their responsibility to this woman entirely. What I am contesting is that it was the way her traffic ticket offenses was handled that led to this- she did NOT die because of traffic tickets. She died because some clowns in a rural jail didn't handle the situation correctly.
  #7  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:34 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 34,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
I'm not talking about bail though; it's the conflation of separate penalties that confuses me.
I didn't mention bail. But it's you who is insisting that it's a separate penalty, when it all flows from one initial act with the predictable consequences of applying the rules of the system.

Quote:
And I get the idea that fines are more onerous to people with less money,
Do you? They're not just "more onerous." Small fines can, by the operation of the justice system, can ruin your life, trap you in an endless maze if you are just below the line of resources and privilege that allow you to escape them.

I received a ticket for having an expired inspection sticker. I took a few hours off work to get my car inspected, and then another few hours off work to go to court to show that I had complied. The judge reduced my fine, but I still had to pay court costs. All-in-all, for several hours of leave from work, I saved only $20.

Imagine if I'm someone who (1) can't afford the inspection, (2) can't get permission from work to take time off for either and would get fired if I did, (3) can't afford the court costs.

Quote:
but barring some kind of income-based penalty scheme
Why?

Quote:
, how would relatively trivial misdemeanors like traffic tickets be punished? Legal penalties are not supposed to be comfortable, after all.
Maybe you have to fundamentally rethink the system, then, think about what it means to enforce the law and what are effective ways of enforcing it, and think about when a penalty, as opposed to something else, is the best solution.

Think about someone like me, to whom the system has effectively imposed a trivial penalty. Sure, it cost me something, but in the long run, it's nothing to me.

And then think about someone without my resources, who can't do any of these things without suffering a penalty no matter what choice he or she makes.
  #8  
Old 09-04-2018, 10:46 AM
Cheesesteak Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 12,853
Why bar an income based penalty scheme?

For a wealthy person a $50 parking ticket is comfortable, or if not exactly comfortable, it's a negligible discomfort. Need to go to court? Take a personal day.

For a less wealthy person, let's say their take home is $20,000 per year, and they spend half of that on rent/utilities, a $50 ticket is a full third of their weekly fungible income. That's a "lets spend 2 weeks eating nothing but Ramen and peanut butter sandwiches" type of punishment. So they're going to what, take a day off of work to go to court? They probably lose more income than the ticket cost in the first place, then *surprise* here's a court fee instead of a ticket fee!

Rather than thinking about it as a cognitive disconnect, see it as a recognition of the precarious position that poor people are in. Something that should be a modest inconvenience can rapidly snowball into a life changing problem due to a lack of resources to manage it.
  #9  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:04 AM
Shodan Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,957
Lots of people think that the rules don't apply to them, because of their own special circumstances. Add to that the conviction that 'if I just ignore it, it will go away.' And some other people are enablers.

And as long as you don't get caught, and even sometimes when you do, the consequences are easier than paying for insurance, or not speeding, or whatever.
Quote:
So I ask, what is the court system to do exactly? Let people opt out of penalties and court dates? Most places let people set up payment plans for that kind of thing already.
Yes, but it is easier - not better, easier - to just blow it off and not bother with your court date. Sure, the judge might issue a warrant, but that won't affect you until you are busted for something else. And that's way in the future. If they could abide by a payment plan, they would have insurance already.

There are two ways of looking at it.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so I better not speed or drive without a license. Vs.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so you should let me speed or drive without a license.
Punishment is supposed to hurt. You are supposed to want to avoid the punishment enough to avoid the behavior that leads to the punishment. If the fine for speeding was $10, so poor people could afford it, you are going to get a lot more people, rich, poor, or middle-class, speeding.

Regards,
Shodan
  #10  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:35 AM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink Thudlow Boink is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 25,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
A little bit of background- the news story that brought this to mind was one where a woman had a large number of outstanding speeding tickets- so many that they issued a bench warrant for her arrest. She got hauled into jail in some podunk Nevada town, whereupon she had some kind of drug-withdrawal related seizures and issues, and the podunk deputies handled it abysmally, and she died.

Of course, the offenderati on Reddit are howling about "She died for SPEEDING TICKETS!" when in fact, she disregarded the whole legal system to the point where they issued a warrant for her arrest, and that's why she was in jail in the first place, after being pulled over for speeding yet again.
Reminds me of the "Last Straw Fallacy" only in reverse. The woman died for speeding tickets just like the baseball team lost because the last batter struck out?
  #11  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:37 AM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,321
The whole thing turns around for matters more serious than parking tickets. When someone is pulled in after not showing up in court for an assault charge they'll say they were arrested for an outstanding warrant and neglect to mention the original crime. Either way this works people are just trying to minimize their offense.
__________________
ed

Last edited by TriPolar; 09-04-2018 at 11:37 AM.
  #12  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:45 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 34,151
“People” aren’t “trying to minimize” offenses. They’re seeking true justice. A woman shouldn’t be dead in a jail cell in this situation.

Things like this should be prompting us to fundamentally rethink what we are doing with our law enforcement system.

Why is the the case that a group of officers—podunk or not—can be so unprepared to adequately respond to the physical and mental health needs of people on their care?

And you can nitpick on the details of any one incident (she’s no angel), and this avoid ever addressing the fundamental questions of justice.
  #13  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:51 AM
bump bump is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,270
You're still missing the point- had she not died, would anyone have uttered a single peep that she was hauled into jail for the warrant? I doubt it- that's what happens when you fundamentally ignore the legal system repeatedly.

That's my point- she wasn't jailed unfairly. She wasn't handled correctly when in jail, but that's a different thing entirely than why she was in jail. She died because her jailers were incompetent. There's no defense for them whatsoever. But she didn't die because of "speeding tickets". That's not why she died- she died because there were incompetents working at that particular jail.

But people seem to be wound up because she was in jail in the first place, which baffles me. What do they expect- the courts to just go "Oh well, she doesn't feel like paying her fines or coming in to court to contest the tickets. I guess we'll just wait until she comes around."?
  #14  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:57 AM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
“People” aren’t “trying to minimize” offenses. They’re seeking true justice. A woman shouldn’t be dead in a jail cell in this situation.
A woman dead in a jail cell after being arrested for a minor violation has nothing to do with minimizing an offense. Nobody should end up dead in a jail cell for any offense and dead people don't characterize what they were arrested for. People minimize their offenses even when treated justly.
__________________
ed
  #15  
Old 09-04-2018, 11:57 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
You're still missing the point- had she not died, would anyone have uttered a single peep that she was hauled into jail for the warrant? I doubt it- that's what happens when you fundamentally ignore the legal system repeatedly.

That's my point- she wasn't jailed unfairly. She wasn't handled correctly when in jail, but that's a different thing entirely than why she was in jail. She died because her jailers were incompetent. There's no defense for them whatsoever. But she didn't die because of "speeding tickets". That's not why she died- she died because there were incompetents working at that particular jail.

But people seem to be wound up because she was in jail in the first place, which baffles me. What do they expect- the courts to just go "Oh well, she doesn't feel like paying her fines or coming in to court to contest the tickets. I guess we'll just wait until she comes around."?
...you do realize that you are the one who is wound up about this right?

This thread is all about how you feel about a few comments on reddit. It isn't about someone being jailed unfairly or not. Its about somebody else holding an opinion on the internet and that particular opinion annoys you.

So somebody on the internet has a different opinion to you. Whats the actual debate here?
  #16  
Old 09-04-2018, 12:23 PM
bump bump is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 16,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...you do realize that you are the one who is wound up about this right?

This thread is all about how you feel about a few comments on reddit. It isn't about someone being jailed unfairly or not. Its about somebody else holding an opinion on the internet and that particular opinion annoys you.

So somebody on the internet has a different opinion to you. Whats the actual debate here?
It's not just this one case; it's an attitude I keep running across- this one just happened to be more annoying than most, since there aren't the mitigating circumstances of poverty.
  #17  
Old 09-04-2018, 01:05 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
“People” aren’t “trying to minimize” offenses. They’re seeking true justice. A woman shouldn’t be dead in a jail cell in this situation.
I didn't read your first post, we're arguing different facets of this issue. I'm not really clear what the OP's point is. I'm saying that independently of just process and outcomes people will minimize their offense. When justice is not served, when the outcome is maximized, comparison to the minimum can be reasonable.
__________________
ed
  #18  
Old 09-04-2018, 01:42 PM
Shodan Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,957
I think often people are conflating the general case with the specific case.

This woman should not have died due to speeding tickets. That's the specific case. The general case is, should people be taken into custody for speeding tickets, knowing that a very small percentage of the time, they will die in custody? You can never reduce human error to zero.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray
“People” aren’t “trying to minimize” offenses. They’re seeking true justice. A woman shouldn’t be dead in a jail cell in this situation.

Things like this should be prompting us to fundamentally rethink what we are doing with our law enforcement system.
How should we fundamentally rethink our justice system to deal with the lady who died? She wasn't poor, so it wasn't a matter of not being able to pay her tickets (presumably). Even if she was, there are less onerous options available, like a payment plan, or community service, or maybe dropping some of the tickets if she pays the rest and completes a safe driver course, or something like that. But she never showed up for her court date. Should she therefore be brought into custody? There is a chance she might die from her drug issues, whatever they were.

So what do we do with her? Not arrest her, and let her speed along her merry way until she kills someone and/or herself? That's not just either, and I expect the chance that she might get into an accident is at least as great as her dying in jail.

Yes, she should not have died, and if the deputies were negligent or malicious they should be sanctioned accordingly. But that doesn't address the issue of what to do about speeders who blow off their court dates.

Regards,
Shodan
  #19  
Old 09-04-2018, 01:56 PM
D'Anconia D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
There are two ways of looking at it.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so I better not speed or drive without a license. Vs.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so you should let me speed or drive without a license.

Regards,
Shodan
Exactly this.

Some posters should watch a tv judge show sometime. It seems like every time the case involves a car accident, the defendant doesn't have valid insurance.

"I have to drive my kids to school, or I have to drive to work" is NOT an excuse to break the law.

If one doesn't have valid license/registration/insurance, you cannot drive. Full stop.

This is not rocket surgery.

Last edited by D'Anconia; 09-04-2018 at 01:58 PM. Reason: spelling
  #20  
Old 09-04-2018, 02:04 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Lots of people think that the rules don't apply to them, because of their own special circumstances.
This QFT.
Just look at the people on the highway that cut people off, drive on the shoulder during rush hour, drive to the end of a merge lane then force their way in, think they have a right to change lanes by signaling (or just pointing to the lane) even if you are there, park in no parking zones, take up 2 (or more) parking spaces, etc.

Those are the sort of people that let tickets go and don't pay them then when arrested on a warrant for 15 unpaid parking tickets or a speeding ticket that has grown from $200 to $1500 with fines and interest complain that it is "just about the ticket(s)". It's not. It's your flagrant middle finger to obeying the law/social contract of driving to begin with and that you're a special snowflake that should be exempt from all rules that inconvience you so af course being held accountable is totally unfair to YOU and being in that situation is totally NOT your fault.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.
  #21  
Old 09-04-2018, 02:12 PM
nelliebly nelliebly is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 940
I don't have a viewpoint yet on fines, as I'm still exploring the issue. What alternative to fines do those who oppose them propose? And what consequences for not fulfilling those alternatives?
  #22  
Old 09-04-2018, 02:26 PM
PastTense PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 7,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
I don't have a viewpoint yet on fines, as I'm still exploring the issue. What alternative to fines do those who oppose them propose? And what consequences for not fulfilling those alternatives?
The obvious alternative to fines is community service--which is unpaid labor. For example you might spend a few hours picking up trash along the roadside. The consequence for not fulfilling any of the alternatives (fine or community service) is jail.

Note fines should be able to be paid over time.

Note in parts of Europe a popular type of fine is the day-fine which varies with income:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

Last edited by PastTense; 09-04-2018 at 02:27 PM.
  #23  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:07 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
I don't have a viewpoint yet on fines, as I'm still exploring the issue. What alternative to fines do those who oppose them propose? And what consequences for not fulfilling those alternatives?
Around here if a person is unable to pay a fine, the magistrate will offer community service at the rate of $10/hr to be applied to the fine.

I agree with the OP. There are people who will continually ignore a minor issue until it becomes a major issue. If the end result is that we just let it slide, then nobody will pay their speeding tickets.
  #24  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:13 PM
Hilarity N. Suze Hilarity N. Suze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 7,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
...]Punishment is supposed to hurt. You are supposed to want to avoid the punishment enough to avoid the behavior that leads to the punishment. If the fine for speeding was $10, so poor people could afford it, you are going to get a lot more people, rich, poor, or middle-class, speeding.

Regards,
Shodan
See, this is the thing. When I had sudden infusions of income I very boldly exceeded the speed limit, only wore my seat belt when I felt like it, and if conditions were right, let my dog off his leash where I wasn't supposed to. Because what the hell, the fine wasn't going to bother me.

I know, I'm a terrible person. But the thing here is that, when I had plenty of money, the punishment was nothing to me. It was just money.

That isn't right. The punishment should equally hurt everyone who breaks the law. But it doesn't. It has a disproportionate effect on people without.

There's really already enough punishment built in to people who don't have enough money, even if they never break the law.

Driving around, it looks to me like everyone's speeding. But some of these people have more to lose than others if they're caught.
  #25  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:26 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink Thudlow Boink is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 25,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
A woman dead in a jail cell after being arrested for a minor violation
I'm not sure, but you might be doing here precisely what the thread title is talking about: confusing the original offense with non-compliance follow-on penalties. She wasn't put in jail for the minor violation of speeding, but for accumulating many speeding tickets and then not paying them.

I'm not sure whether or not she deserved to be in jail; and nobody's saying she deserved to end up dead. But I think that, if you rack up and ignore enough speeding tickets, it ceases to be a "minor violation."
  #26  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:28 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 40,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
I'm not talking about bail though; it's the conflation of separate penalties that confuses me. .
It's not this issue, it is, in terms of understanding new stories, all of them. People don't notice the subtleties.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #27  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:41 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
I'm not sure, but you might be doing here precisely what the thread title is talking about: confusing the original offense with non-compliance follow-on penalties. She wasn't put in jail for the minor violation of speeding, but for accumulating many speeding tickets and then not paying them.

I'm not sure whether or not she deserved to be in jail; and nobody's saying she deserved to end up dead. But I think that, if you rack up and ignore enough speeding tickets, it ceases to be a "minor violation."
No, I'm saying in a case like you describe dying in a jail cell is not justified by the original offense or the follow ups. I was originally only stating that everyone minimizes their offenses whether or not the result was just. If the result has bet maximized, or in the case of death in jail cell exceeding the legal maximum, then it is reasonable to point out the disparity. But if someone gets a speeding ticket and pays a hefty price for ignoring the ticket then it's no excuse to say it was only a speeding ticket. That though assumes the process is just. But you don't have much credibility if you shoot and kill someone and then say you are spending your life in prison because you had an unlicensed gun.
__________________
ed
  #28  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:42 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilarity N. Suze View Post
See, this is the thing. When I had sudden infusions of income I very boldly exceeded the speed limit, only wore my seat belt when I felt like it, and if conditions were right, let my dog off his leash where I wasn't supposed to. Because what the hell, the fine wasn't going to bother me.

I know, I'm a terrible person. But the thing here is that, when I had plenty of money, the punishment was nothing to me. It was just money.

That isn't right. The punishment should equally hurt everyone who breaks the law. But it doesn't. It has a disproportionate effect on people without.

There's really already enough punishment built in to people who don't have enough money, even if they never break the law.

Driving around, it looks to me like everyone's speeding. But some of these people have more to lose than others if they're caught.
IMHO, you are addressing an argument for another thread: Whether fines should be proportioned to income or wealth.

Regardless of the law, if I get a $200 fine for speeding, I have to address that, either by paying or by going to court, or calling, emailing, or writing a letter to the court, and pleading with the judge or the prosecutor to give me more time to pay or an alternative method of satisfying it. I cannot just pitch the ticket in the garbage or sit on my ass and bitch about how the system is unfair.
  #29  
Old 09-04-2018, 03:52 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
"I have to drive my kids to school, or I have to drive to work" is NOT an excuse to break the law.

If one doesn't have valid license/registration/insurance, you cannot drive. Full stop.

It can be under highly unusual circumstances. We bought a car and the dealer could not give us the title because he refused to pay the floorplan company. In my state
1) It is impossible to permanently register a car without a title
2) The investigator could only OK a 30 day permit.
3) You HAVE to go to the DMV office in your home county to temp-register a car and only the owner can register it.

This means that short of taking a day off from work every month I would have to wait until Friday to get through Denver rush hour plus another 50 miles and pray I got there before the DMV closed (usually with less than 5 minutes to spare) to re-register my car for another 30 days. And this was over a year and a half.

And yes the car was stopped once for not having current registration. When we explained the situation the judge was sympathetic and apologized that the law was strict-liability. After we explained the situation, the ahole cop (in a flak jacket in court no less) berated Mrs. Cad and used his time to "re-examine" her by saying
"Why were you driving in MY city without registration."
"Because I had to take my son to school."
<Cop rolls eyes>
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.

Last edited by Saint Cad; 09-04-2018 at 03:54 PM.
  #30  
Old 09-04-2018, 04:00 PM
Cheesesteak Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
It's your flagrant middle finger to obeying the law/social contract of driving to begin with
The issue, and it's really more of an observation than a lead in to some kind of Universal Truth... Obeying the social contract is often a function of money. Behave in a stupid/inconsiderate/borderline dangerous manner and all is forgiven if you write a prompt check for the bill.

Quote:
arrested on a warrant for 15 unpaid parking tickets
A poor person racks up 15 unpaid tickets in 3 years and he gets thrown in jail. Another person* can rack up 10 tickets a week and it's all good just as long as he (or his employer) pays up promptly. The town probably doesn't even want him to stop, dude is a serious money maker!

A few days ago I was listening to the radio (NYC station) and the host mentioned how he parked for work in the wee hours the day before and was surprised at the number of spots on the street. He messed up his days and didn't realize it was a no-parking day, so he got a ticket. For him, a guy with a good job, it was a chuckle about how dumb he was. For someone living paycheck to paycheck, it's time to sit at the kitchen table with the wife, and try to figure out what the family will have to do without.

*such as a UPS driver
  #31  
Old 09-04-2018, 04:12 PM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Lots of people think that the rules don't apply to them, because of their own special circumstances. Add to that the conviction that 'if I just ignore it, it will go away.' And some other people are enablers.

And as long as you don't get caught, and even sometimes when you do, the consequences are easier than paying for insurance, or not speeding, or whatever. Yes, but it is easier - not better, easier - to just blow it off and not bother with your court date. Sure, the judge might issue a warrant, but that won't affect you until you are busted for something else. And that's way in the future. If they could abide by a payment plan, they would have insurance already.

There are two ways of looking at it.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so I better not speed or drive without a license. Vs.
  • I can't afford to pay the fines, so you should let me speed or drive without a license.
Punishment is supposed to hurt. You are supposed to want to avoid the punishment enough to avoid the behavior that leads to the punishment. If the fine for speeding was $10, so poor people could afford it, you are going to get a lot more people, rich, poor, or middle-class, speeding.

Regards,
Shodan
So, it sounds like what you are saying is that speeding and parking tickets are not punishments to well off people, as the punishment doesn't hurt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
This QFT.
Just look at the people on the highway that cut people off, drive on the shoulder during rush hour, drive to the end of a merge lane then force their way in, think they have a right to change lanes by signaling (or just pointing to the lane) even if you are there, park in no parking zones, take up 2 (or more) parking spaces, etc.

Those are the sort of people that let tickets go and don't pay them then when arrested on a warrant for 15 unpaid parking tickets or a speeding ticket that has grown from $200 to $1500 with fines and interest complain that it is "just about the ticket(s)". It's not. It's your flagrant middle finger to obeying the law/social contract of driving to begin with and that you're a special snowflake that should be exempt from all rules that inconvience you so af course being held accountable is totally unfair to YOU and being in that situation is totally NOT your fault.
Everyone that I have even known that drove like this did so specifically because they were not worried about the fines, they had money, connections, or lawyers which meant that there was not even an inconvenience to them for this sort of driving, much less a punishment.
  #32  
Old 09-04-2018, 04:26 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
It can be under highly unusual circumstances. We bought a car and the dealer could not give us the title because he refused to pay the floorplan company. In my state
1) It is impossible to permanently register a car without a title
2) The investigator could only OK a 30 day permit.
3) You HAVE to go to the DMV office in your home county to temp-register a car and only the owner can register it.

This means that short of taking a day off from work every month I would have to wait until Friday to get through Denver rush hour plus another 50 miles and pray I got there before the DMV closed (usually with less than 5 minutes to spare) to re-register my car for another 30 days. And this was over a year and a half.

And yes the car was stopped once for not having current registration. When we explained the situation the judge was sympathetic and apologized that the law was strict-liability. After we explained the situation, the ahole cop (in a flak jacket in court no less) berated Mrs. Cad and used his time to "re-examine" her by saying
"Why were you driving in MY city without registration."
"Because I had to take my son to school."
<Cop rolls eyes>
I'm obviously not your lawyer, but why did you accept the car at the outset? The dealer breached your contract by not delivering title. I'm not sure why you would put up with that for a year and a half.
  #33  
Old 09-04-2018, 04:28 PM
D'Anconia D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
It can be under highly unusual circumstances.
Can you provide a cite that Colorado, or any other state, has an exemption written into the law that allows people to drive an unregistered or uninsured vehicle?
  #34  
Old 09-04-2018, 06:35 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Can you provide a cite that Colorado, or any other state, has an exemption written into the law that allows people to drive an unregistered or uninsured vehicle?
They don't hence the fine. My point is that with something out of our control it is reasonable to drive without registration but we still ended up paying the fine. And from the Judge's comments he may had been willing to dismiss the case had it not been a strict-liability violation.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.

Last edited by Saint Cad; 09-04-2018 at 06:37 PM.
  #35  
Old 09-04-2018, 06:36 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I'm obviously not your lawyer, but why did you accept the car at the outset? The dealer breached your contract by not delivering title. I'm not sure why you would put up with that for a year and a half.
We had made payments before taking delivery. The alternative was to just write-off $4000 and not have a car.
__________________
If all else fails, try S.C.E. to Aux.
  #36  
Old 09-04-2018, 07:30 PM
D'Anconia D'Anconia is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
My point is that with something out of our control it is reasonable to drive without registration but we still ended up paying the fine.
Well, I disagree that it's reasonable to drive without registration.

Even in a medical emergency, it's likely one would get better care from the EMTs rather that driving themselves.
  #37  
Old 09-04-2018, 07:35 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 39,321
Yeah, sorry Saint Cad, it was convenient for you but not reasonable. Given the circumstances it was also reasonable to let you off lightly and unreasonable for a cop to act like a dick.
__________________
ed
  #38  
Old 09-04-2018, 08:20 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
It's not just this one case; it's an attitude I keep running across- this one just happened to be more annoying than most, since there aren't the mitigating circumstances of poverty.
...more annoying than casually dismissing the tragic circumstances of somebody's death because "there aren't the mitigating circumstances of poverty?"
  #39  
Old 09-05-2018, 01:46 AM
blob's Avatar
blob blob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
casually dismissing the tragic circumstances of somebody's death
That's unfair. The OP has said several times that the prison staff were at fault, and also that he/she was complaining people on discussion forum.
  #40  
Old 09-05-2018, 02:21 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by blob View Post
That's unfair. The OP has said several times that the prison staff were at fault, and also that he/she was complaining people on discussion forum.
...not unfair at all. Read the post I quoted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
It's not just this one case; it's an attitude I keep running across- this one just happened to be more annoying than most, since there aren't the mitigating circumstances of poverty.
That post shows a callous disregard for Kelly Coltrain. We haven't even mentioned her name in this thread. bump's annoyance at comments made by random anonymous reddit posters is enhanced because Coltrain apparently isn't poor enough.

How on earth am I being unfair?

If I had a choice: I'd be much more annoyed with bump's post in this thread than I would be by a hypothetical reddit poster. I'm with the "offenderati".
  #41  
Old 09-05-2018, 02:32 AM
Velocity Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 12,766
To answer the OP: People have a tendency to draw lines directly between Point A and Point Z if it suits them, even if it's truly a case of Point A to B and then from B to C, and then eventually from Y to Z.

Or the saying: "To someone with a hammer, everything looks like a nail." So if someone is convinced that society lacks compassion, they will readily believe the idea that someone went to jail for speeding tickets even when that isn't truly the case.
  #42  
Old 09-05-2018, 02:48 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,296
She died for speeding tickets and failure to pay them. She committed no other acts that led to her death.
Not having paid the tickets is not a mitigating circumstance that makes the death okay, so some will leave it out.

The only way I would correct her is to say that she died for unpaid speeding tickets. It's no less outrageous.
  #43  
Old 09-05-2018, 03:56 AM
blob's Avatar
blob blob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...not unfair at all. Read the post I quoted.
Read ALL of the posts. Context. Apply some.
  #44  
Old 09-05-2018, 04:21 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by blob View Post
Read ALL of the posts. Context. Apply some.
...I've read all of the posts. I replied to a specific post, which was in response to a post that I made, that I quoted in full, and didn't remove any context. I don't give a fuck if bump has said "several times that the prison staff were at fault." One can both think that "the prison staff were at fault" and be "casually dismissing the tragic circumstances of somebody's death" at the same time.

And when somebody states that "It's not just this one case; it's an attitude I keep running across- this one just happened to be more annoying than most, since there aren't the mitigating circumstances of poverty" I'm entirely happy to characterize that post as casually dismissing the tragic circumstances of somebody's death. Because it is. Because if Coltrain were poor it would have mitigated the annoyance.
  #45  
Old 09-05-2018, 07:34 AM
hogarth hogarth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
After keeping up with the news recently, it seems that a huge chunk of the population has some kind of fundamental logical disconnect between people who commit an original offense of some sort, and any follow-on penalties for not actually complying with the requirements of that first offense, be it coming to court, paying a fine, etc...
I think it just makes a snappier clickbait headline to say something like "British mum in jail after ONE drink on plane" than "British mum in jail after getting in a heated argument with airport security".
  #46  
Old 09-05-2018, 07:51 AM
UnwittingAmericans UnwittingAmericans is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by bump View Post
Why do people confuse the original offense with non-compliance follow on penalties?
Probably the same phenomenon that caused all except one of the replies not to address the question.

Last edited by UnwittingAmericans; 09-05-2018 at 07:53 AM.
  #47  
Old 09-05-2018, 08:06 AM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink Thudlow Boink is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 25,891
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
She died for speeding tickets and failure to pay them. She committed no other acts that led to her death.
Not having paid the tickets is not a mitigating circumstance that makes the death okay, so some will leave it out.

The only way I would correct her is to say that she died for unpaid speeding tickets. It's no less outrageous.
So you're saying "she died for" is a legitimate synonym for "she committed no other acts that led to her death"?

By that standard, if a woman is hit and killed by a drunk driver on her way to the grocery store, can we say she died for groceries?
  #48  
Old 09-05-2018, 08:33 AM
Shodan Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT
She died for speeding tickets and failure to pay them. She committed no other acts that led to her death.
That, and being addicted to drugs. Rather few people die from withdrawal from not paying speeding tickets.

It's terrible that she died. But there is a great deal more to it than 'let's just not arrest people who ignore their court dates'.

Regards,
Shodan
  #49  
Old 09-05-2018, 09:05 AM
k9bfriender k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink View Post
So you're saying "she died for" is a legitimate synonym for "she committed no other acts that led to her death"?

By that standard, if a woman is hit and killed by a drunk driver on her way to the grocery store, can we say she died for groceries?
Sure, because the analogy here is to what killed a person, which is the drunk driver, so the OP could be analogized into your analogy as "Well, of course the drunk driver was at fault, as I said several times, but if she hadn't been getting groceries, then this wouldn't have been a problem."
  #50  
Old 09-05-2018, 09:38 AM
Shodan Shodan is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 37,957
The analogy breaks down at that level, because "getting groceries" is not immoral nor illegal. Speeding, ignoring your court date, and abusing drugs, is both. So that factor affects it.

Regards,
Shodan
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017