Worst. Anecdotal. Evidence. Ever.
I caught the relevant quotes out of the first cite, and have looked at the others provided. You still have a long way to go to prove that quotas are a widespread police policy.
You are correct about it being hard to prove though. No department in their right mind would admit to it.
There are simply too many variables to make such a system practical (e.g. the distinction between income and wealth, the issues that arise when a family has partially shared resources and control) as others have pointed out. It would be as absurd as trying to figure out that Joe Blow isn’t all that bothered by prison life and Richard Roe would barely survive, and therefore their incarcerations for the same crime should be adjusted up and down, respectively.
Yeah, that’s all it is. Those 25 mph signs around schools - that’s just a scam to make money. :rolleyes:
How many cites do you want? I found dozens of cites explaining that there is an informal quota. Plus, I’ve known cops that have admitted as much. What more do you want?
The PBA is the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Assoc. You can donate money to them, and in return (usually) you can get what’s called a PBA card. It’s a card that you can present a cop when you are pulled over that will often get you out of a ticket. It’s not 100%, but it helps out a lot, esp. if you donate lots of money.
Do most people doing to prison for things a street cop would arrest them for have millions of dollars to bribe them even if they wanted to? The fact that an infraction (speeding) most people consider harmless could warrant a 100k ticket creates a fertile environment for bribery. I repeat, there are very few circumstances in which an average cop would be dealing with such potentially large amounts of money.
I never said widespread use, I said many cities. You cite doesn’t mention that many places have cameras they use to monitor general traffic flow, speed, and other things. There are a few along major highways in New Jersey. Either way, I think my initial statement is still true.
Prove it.
Errrrr, let me think of the things a traffic policeman might encounter…drug trafficking? Stolen vehicles? Drunk driving? Plenty of things with far harsher penalties than a speeding fine. But these don’t seem to cause a ‘fertile environment for bribery’, so what is so unique about an expensive speeding fine?
What have they got to do with anything in this thread?
Your ‘initial statement’ was in response to my pointing out that many jurisdictions rely heavily on speed cameras, and rarely use police officers to catch speeding drivers. So no, it doesn’t hold true.
Wow, that’s a really brave challenge - given that I’d already stated I had no firm evidence.
Oh, and thanks for pointing out I’d screwed up the link to the pit thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=313760
Gee, I never noticed that speed limit signs are only near schools, or that cops usually hang out in such places to set their speed traps…mostly I’ve noticed such things on highways or other well traveled areas. You’ve opened my eyes and I’ve seen the light!! Its not all just a big scam for the states to make money!! I would have never guessed this on my own. Thanks for fighting my ignorance.
-XT
I’m really not trying to be dense here, but you’ve mentioned anecdotal evidence and provided links to three cases. Not dozens. Three: the NYPD, The Jonesboro Police, and the Gilmore Police. That’s three out of how many police departments? If you want to spread that across the entire country to paint a policy picture, that’s your business.
And the cops you’ve known that have mentioned it count for squadoo. Anecdotal evidence that is easily countered. I’ve been pulled over at least a dozen times and recieved one ticket. Maybe the officers were ahead on their quotas.
Oh, so all speed limits are just a way to raise finances? :rolleyes:
(Here’s a suggestion - maybe you notice them more on well-travelled roads because, umm, you travel on them more?
Have you ever been poor? I have. $200 is a LOT of money when your income is $300 a week. All your money is budgeted ahead of time for food, rent, transportation – there isn’t some magincal “low income” mode of survival here, people who have less moneyh have to get by with less. They drive old beaters instead of nice cars, when they can drive. They ride the bus. They don’t go out to eat. It totally, completely sucks as a lifestyle. $200 fine might be doable for some poor people, but for most poor people, it’s a major problem.
If you can’t grok the concept that $200 is a hell of a lot more to a poor person than a rich one, I don’t know if we have enough in common to debate.
Let’s see if an analogy will help, since any mention of class inequality gets our conservative brethren all hot and squinky.
Suppose the fine were fifty pushups. Intended to be punitive. But for Joe Gymrat it’s a breeze, a walk in the park, no problem. For Jack Couch Potato, it’s an exhausting ordeal, humiliating and dangerous if he’s got high blood pressure – and he probably does. The intent is to be punitive, but the effect of that punishment is wildly different from person to person. So Joe Gymrat does wheelies and drives on the sidewalk and speeds like hell, because the fine is NOTHING to him.
Does make a difference, y’know?
You people aren’t getting it.
That is an illogical leap.
You cannot compare a person purchasing something (exchanging money for a product/service) with a punishment that is intended to “hurt” the punishee.
Paying a fine is not equal to buying something.
Well, it seems Kimi Raikonnen has gotten a fine of 30 000 Euros due to this law. Is the 200 000$ mentioned in that article his yearly income? I though it would be a lot more than that.
Why are some people spending so much time arguing that it won’t work when the very fact that the OP exists shows it does work? And it’s already at work in several countries? Will it work perfectly, every time? Of course not. Neither does our current system. What does “work” mean, anyway? Will it reduce parking and moving violations? That would be a punitive success. We could look at the data from countries who have implemented this system and see, instead of making wild guesses. Will it increase revenue for the state? That would be a fund-raising success. Again, let’s look and see!
The question isn’t whether a system like this is possible or practical - it IS possible; it’s been done already. The question is whether we think it’s a good idea and if we think it should be implemented HERE (wherever here is to you.)
The article linked to the OP shows that it has created a system where a routine speeding ticket leads to a round of court appeals. That doesn’t sound like it “does work” terribly well.
No, the rich are already getting hit in the wallets for being rich at tax time. If you are so worried about getting a ticket if you are poor, don’t do anything that will get you that ticket.
I am still waiting to hear any evidence that people in higher tax brackets actually break laws more than those in lower ones. If they don’t then there is no reason to do anything as the system in place is working equally for all people (whether it is effective in preventing people from continuing in their actions is another matter).
No - it’s a single extreme example where the calculation of the fine includes a large chunk of share options. Not a routine case.
Because you “think”?? You’re using the term loosly.
Here’s the deal…
All of you that “think” fines should be based according to one’s income are abandoning the American system of justice for one that could easily be designed by Karl Marx, with his “from each according to his abilities” philosophy.
See, the American justice system is represented by Lady Justice, who is blindfolded and holding the balanced scales of equal justice.
When irrelevancies, such as one’s income, are taken into consideration by the justice system, Lady Justice is peeking out from underneath her blindfold and the scales are no longer balanced.
There, “Godwin” that.
Ah, yes - the guy who said, duh, you guys is commies, believes I am using the term “think” loosely. 
Here’s a clue, Skippy - not everything you disagree with is “communism”.
I get it, I just don’t think the picture of a person making minim wage who owns a car and a house is all too common. That was my only gripe. Most of these people rent houses/rooms, and use public transportation.