Why aren't traffic tickets different for wealthy?

[kanicbird]

@Loach

I seem to remember seeing somewhere, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

The punishment is supposed to fit the crime not the criminal.

But the punishment can also be seen as taking x% of your net worth or x% of your income. With this interpretation a $500 fine may be seen as excessive for someone with a annual income of $10,000 or less.

And I don’t agree with the punishment is suppose to fit the crime, that just sounds like revenge - which does not karmically or, I would argue, practically work. But the punishment is ideally suppose to correct the person who committed the act and deter others from committing the crime. Which means it fits the criminal.

[naita]

@kanicbird

The type of road really does not matter, the speed limit, and the enforcement tolerance in my suggestion would be according to road situation.

But no I do not know how inland sets up and enforces speed limits. I proposed a example that would help correct some of the wrongness of our US current system of how we implement speed limits and enforcement, but I am open to other systems, it was just a example.

You could have made that clearer, considering you started with a quote and speeding violation example from Finland.

[Loach]

@kanicbird

But the punishment can also be seen as taking x% of your net worth or x% of your income. With this interpretation a $500 fine may be seen as excessive for someone with a annual income of $10,000 or less.

And I don’t agree with the punishment is suppose to fit the crime, that just sounds like revenge - which does not karmically or, I would argue, practically work. But the punishment is ideally suppose to correct the person who committed the act and deter others from committing the crime. Which means it fits the criminal.

You don’t have to agree. But the constitution and case law do.

[Darth_Panda]

@t-bonham@scc.net

Shoot him. Then you have determined his life expectancy.

I always wondered what people meant when they said “You altered the outcome by measuring it!”

The more you know.

[Pixel_Dent]

Because the foundation of our legal system is justice, not fairness.

[Blue_Blistering_Barnacle]

@Cagey_Drifter

Er, I apologize for my forthrightness, but surely you haven’t thought this through. Sure, fines are a method of collecting money for a city, but it’s not the only function. Fines, like any form of punishment are an attempt to curb certain types of behavior. Why do people fear the time running out on their parking meters? Because they’ll get fined! Cities institute the time limit to ensure some level of fairness in parking to the many motorists on city streets. Yes, the cities rely on the fact that not everyone is going to comply to gain revenue for the city, but it doesn’t mean that the fine was only instituted to collect money.

I think you will have a hard time justifying your statement.

Well, yes, fines are a BOTH a deterrant AND a revenue stream. Which is more important may depend on the time and place. We seem to be in a period where revenue collection is a strong prioriy. Hence, the numerous news reports of quotas; when I hear “quota”, I am disinclined to believe that this is about public safety.

The Chicago Red Light Camera Scandal is representative. The revenue could be adjusted by changing the yellow light duration. Here is a timeline from the Chicago tribune- slip forward to the summer of 2014.

Timeline of red light cameras

Also, in the evaluation of Ferguson and the surrounding communities after last summer’s events, it became clear that local communities were collecting inordinate fines, presumably as a source of revenue (vs punitively).

[kanicbird]

@Pixel_Dent

Because the foundation of our legal system is justice, not fairness.

What is the difference :dubious:

jus·tice
ˈjəstəs/
noun
noun: justice; plural noun: justices

1.
just behavior or treatment.
"a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people"
synonyms:	fairness, justness, fair play, fair-mindedness, equity, evenhandedness, impartiality, objectivity, neutrality, disinterestedness, honesty, righteousness, morals, morality
"I appealed to his sense of justice"
    the quality of being fair and reasonable.
    "the justice of his case"
    the administration of the law or authority in maintaining this.
    "a tragic miscarriage of justice"
    the personification of justice, usually a blindfolded woman holding scales and a sword.
    noun: Justice
2.
a judge or magistrate, in particular a judge of the supreme court of a country or state.
synonyms:	judge, magistrate, jurist
"an order made by the justices"

From justice - Google Search

[sunstone]

Why not use other criteria rather than wealth to make fine levels? Why not intelligence? Why not age? Why not gender? Why not charge a person with a religion that emphasizes living with few material goods less that the majority of the population?

I think the simple answer to your question is that fines are the same for all incomes because people have the same rights/protections regardless of extraneous factors to the actual “crime” committed.

We are all expected to obey the rules we have made for ourselves - even if a single individual disagrees with the law, that individual is held to the same standard as those who support the law. Equality doesn’t mean that everyone is the same; equality means that opportunity and commitment to obeying the law is the same for us all regardless of income, gender, religion, and so forth.

We all gain by our common social contracts.

[bob_2]

@sunstone

I think the simple answer to your question is that fines are the same for all incomes because people have the same rights/protections regardless of extraneous factors to the actual “crime” committed.

But they don’t do they. People with average incomes or less are more likely to plead guilty than wealthy people who can afford to employ lawyers. Very wealthy people can afford the best lawyers so they are even less likely to be convicted.

[filmstar-en]

Driving tests in Finland are rather more exacting than in other countries and the standard of driving that is expect of motorists is higher.

Fines are a deterrent. Unless they are proportionate to income, they would not be an effective deterrent to anyone with a large disposable income.

Of course, there are alternatives…loss of license or maybe a jail term.

How do you stop selfish rich people from endangering the lives of others by dangerous driving?

[GreasyJack]

@bob_2

But they don’t do they. People with average incomes or less are more likely to plead guilty than wealthy people who can afford to employ lawyers. Very wealthy people can afford the best lawyers so they are even less likely to be convicted.

Although that does bring up one practical point. In most US states, things like speeding tickets are only civil infractions, which means there’s much lower standards of due process and evidence and so forth than there is in a criminal charge. Usually the maximum penalty that can be levied for a civil infraction is only a few hundred dollars, so if you start giving rich people huge speeding tickets those would have to become criminal matters. It’s not a huge deal, but it makes prosecuting them a lot more labor intensive for the local prosecutor’s office. Especially since you can bet pretty much all the high-dollar tickets are going to get challenged and maybe even appealed.

[blue_infinity]

@Loach

You don’t have to agree. But the constitution and case law do.

I disagree with your interpretation of the constitution. I don’t believe it bars income based fines.

As for case law. This is the famous granny spilling her coffee in a McDonald’s parking lot case.

In addition, they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan’s suggestion to penalize McDonald’s for one or two days’ worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.

This wasn’t the final amount, it was appealed and eventually settled out of court. However, it seems that adjusting the size of the fine to the criminal’s ability to pay, is in no sense prohibited. One or two days coffee revenue for McDonalds is a very different amount to one or two days revenue for a local diner.

[pkbites]

@blue_infinity

I disagree with your interpretation of the constitution. I don’t believe it bars income based fines.

As for case law. This is the famous granny spilling her coffee in a McDonald’s parking lot case.

This wasn’t the final amount, it was appealed and eventually settled out of court. However, it seems that adjusting the size of the fine to the criminal’s ability to pay, is in no sense prohibited. One or two days coffee revenue for McDonalds is a very different amount to one or two days revenue for a local diner.

:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:

Criminal and civil law are the difference between shooting a bullet and throwing it!

Your cite is of no example to this thread.

[blue_infinity]

Ok then, a monograph from the US Dept of Justice. PDF

Structured fines, or day fines, are a monetary sanction adjusted according to the seriousness of the offense and the financial status of the offender to guarantee that every sentence imposes a negative impact. Initiated and widely used with remarkable success in Western Europe, structured fines are just beginning to be used in the United States as an alternative intermediate sanction.

Please explain how this is forbidden by the US constitution. :dubious:

[septimus]

@kanicbird

I do question if 14 over the limit is in anyway dangerous, speed limits seem to be set assume people will exceed them, I’m sure most cops would give other cops a pass on it (which means either that it is safe (so no fine is justified), …

There’s a “grace” margin on speeding, but seldom as high as 14 mph (22 kph). I’ve been fined in U.S. what would be a week’s minimum wage for much less serious offenses.

Anyway, calling the guy a “millionaire” tells us little. If his net worth is only $1,000,000 (the old definition of millionaire), a $50,000 fine is huge. If he makes a million per month (and tens of thousands of people do), the fine means he’ll just serve a lesser brand of caviar next time he parties with a gaggle of hookers.

[pool]

Besides it being morally wrong in my opinion, it just leads to profiling and abuse by the police. I’m not gonna worry about the broke ass guy in the 1992 Honda Civic driving 40mph over the speed limit in a shitbox if I can pull over the guy in the Bentley going 20mph over that is a multi millionaire because I’ll generate way more revenue even if the guy in the Honda is more of a danger.

[pkbites]

@blue_infinity

Ok then, a monograph from the US Dept of Justice. PDF

Please explain how this is forbidden by the US constitution. :dubious:

Because of the 8th Amendments prohibition against excessive fines. Just because someone is a billionaire doesn’t mean fining them millions of dollars for speeding isn’t excessive.