Where’s Bricker?
Thanks for that–I have never successfully articulated this thought, though I’ve tried.
I don’t support this idea, since it would encourage rich people to offer large bribes to get out of speeding tickets. Speeding is different from other crimes, since most people don’t actually regard speeding as an actual crime. A lot of police officers that wouldn’t be tempted by bribes by drug dealers would be likely to tempted by an offer of $2,000 to write a warning for doing 10 over instead of a ticket.
From my experience, most people are deterred a lot more by the points than the fines. The real fine gets accessed by insurance company when they raise your rates and the real penalty is getting your license suspended.
So if the points are the penalty, why the fine?
I’ve had it too, this was just the point it finally crystallized.
He probably already wrote a counter argument before writing the thread, he’s waiting for the argument that best fits before he posts it.
Last I saw him, he was out on the edge of the highway wearing an orange vest, and picking up trash…
Somehow I don’t think I think I’m buying what those people think I think I’m buying.
Quite the opposite. Right now a person can get a $150 speeding ticket, sign the back, and mail in check. Ratchet up that number and you force everyone to contest the ticket, now the courts are bogged down listening to EVERY traffic violation.
So funny story: in Quebec the police from multiple levels managed to work together to a MASSIVE bust against the Hells Angels biker gang, arresting hundreds I believe. A few weeks later the courts announced that they can’t process them all in a timely fashion, so they had to be released.
Forcing more people to plead their case in court just runs up the court costs for everyone.
You want a what now? What exactly do you think you’re message is saying to the rest of us?
You are proposing a sliding scale, which you like because as income/wealth goes up you get to slide the fine up.
Simple logic: what if a person has zero wealth/income, then what do you fine him? By YOUR simple god damned logic that person gets fined zero. YOUR simple god damned logic means that person shouldn’t be punished.
How do you propose we punish someone with nothing to lose?
Once again, how do you assess/measure the level of pain an individual feels? I very easily pointed out how a person making $100k might feel a loss more than a person making $20k. At some point you’ll realize diminishing marginal utility isn’t so cut and dry.
Simple, everyone is beaten with a kryptonite cane so it’s Superman that is unfairly punished.
Once again, how do you propose to measure the pain with which someone is hurt?
And when did criminal justice become about hurting someone?
Maybe what we need is a speeding fine tax credit to offset the pain felt by the poor???
Assessing wealth is a big practical problem, but how about a reasonable and relevant proxy - the value of the car?
Resale values for the vast majority of cars can be looked up pretty easily and richer people tend to drive more expensive cars. Chances are you’ll only have a custom car without a standard valuation if you are relatively wealthy, in which case you can choose to either pay for an independent valuation, or pay based on the car’s purchase price and the cost of upgrades if you have the relevant documentation.
To avoid loopholes perhaps the basis should be the most valuable of any cars registered to you and the one you were speeding in, though perhaps that would introduce unfair bureaucracy in some cases.
Fines are then set as percentages of the car’s value for different levels of speeding infraction.
No one is asking for unfair punishments.
By taking a uniform percentage of income away from them. This wouldn’t even be progressive, it would be like a flat tax.
For instance, your speeding fine could be 1% of your monthly income for each 5 (full) mph over the limit. Someone who makes $1200 a month pumping gas would be fined $12 per 5mph over. Someone who makes $1,200,000 a month producing records would be fined $12,000 per 5 mph over the limit.
Both feel the pinch equally.
It’s about punishments. I understand you want rich people to be punished less, but that’s an ideological devotion to wealth, not a compelling argument.
That’s a stupid suggestion. And you don’t take it seriously, so why should I respond to it past this sentence?
How do you measure that? It’s obvious you’re making a direct relationship between a person’s income and how much pain the feel in losing it. But how do you measure that to ensure it’s equal?
If you are going to hit everyone with a cane that spits out gum, how are you going to make sure everyone is hurt equally? Right now you are making a rather bigoted assumption based on either income or wealth.
In your caning hypothetical, you simply assumed Superman wouldn’t be hurt as bad. Imagine if someone suggested black people have a higher tolerance for pain so should be hit harder? Pretty obviously wrong, but it’s what you’re suggesting with income/wealth.
It’s as stupid and most of the things written in this thread, and frankly is part of the logic used to offset regressive taxes on the poor. But I’m impressed you recognized it as stupid, sadly there are people that won’t.
I want you to quote the source of the claim that:
So, uh where are these moneyless people getting free cars, free gas, and free insurance?
Seems like they have financial support coming in somewhere.
No you masturbated about widows and orphans and splurted an unlikely scenario all over your keyboard.
However I even took the time to address it.
I don’t have to ensure anything. I have to stride to a society where everyone is treated equally.
I don’t advocate caning, personally. But if you wanted everyone to be hurt equally, you’d likely control for size and skin thickness.
Superman wouldn’t be hurt at all. Unless Darkseid is doing it, using a promethium cane.
I don’t think that black people have a higher tolerance for pain. But I do think that wealthy people have more money.
So, you’re for a regressive tax system?
This is probably the best way to do it. All cars with plates are registered, plus many states already charge you the market value of a car as a sales tax minimum.
The fine is to pay for operating the system. After all, if it wasn’t for the scofflaws, we wouldn’t have to pay for police officers to enforce the traffic laws.
But don’t the rich get more from a functioning traffic system more than the poor? Why should fees for overseeing it be equally divided among poor and rich law breakers?
The fine is to pay for operating the system. After all, if it wasn’t for the scofflaws, we wouldn’t have to pay for police officers to enforce the traffic laws.
Psst… above you!