Earlier you were talking about people who would have their lives ruined if they had to pay a $200 ticket. Now you want to take away their car. How are they going to get to work?
Regards,
Shodan
I’m having trouble reconciling your statement:
with your statement:
Isn’t taking their car away a “punishment”? How can they pay through wage garnishment if they don’t have a job? Even if they do, isn’t that “punishment”?
If they get their license taken away because they are a danger to other drivers, they can get to work the same way as the dangerous driver with a good job. That is, they can walk for all I care, it ain’t my problem.
My beef is when it has more to do with writing a check or showing your face somewhere than endangering other drivers.
Both of you seem to be confusing the need for public safety with your desire to punish people for violating the rules. These are two different things, only combined because the same agencies are tasked with both.
If a person has demonstrated that they are not able to operate a motor vehicle safely then for public safety, you take away their ability to operate a motor vehicle until they have demonstrated that they have learned to do so. That certainly can affect their life negatively, but it is the least harm necessary to impose in order to protect the public. I also advocate for a much more robust public transit system, specifically in order to prevent people from being in situations where they have no practical legal options for transportation.
If a person has demonstrated that they are not able to pay a fine, then giving them further fines serves what purpose in protecting public safety, exactly?
If someone keeps running with scissors, you take away their scissors, you don’t break their ankles.
Now, I’ve answered a couple of times, with further clarifications, as to what I feel should be done about someone who continues to be a danger to the public with their unsafe driving. If you have follow up questions, I will be happy to address those, however, I do ask, one more time, what you think should be the appropriate consequence for someone that gets a ticket for 4mph over the limit, is unable to get time off work to challenge it in court, and cannot afford the fine? Should further punishment be meted out upon such a person?
Keep in mind, also, that poor people get pulled over more. When I have driven a beater car, cops would follow me, looking for an excuse to pull me over, and often times giving me very flimsy reasons when they did. When I’ve driven “respectable” cars, I had to be doing something pretty blatant to attract the attention of traffic enforcement.
So, follow up question, what should be done about a person who gets numerous speeding tickets for 2-3 mph over the limit, violations for “improper lane changes”, and other petty stuff that they would let go for you? Would that change at all, if they were a part of a minority that has been shown to have been disproportionately targeted by law enforcement in that area?
There’s a guy here who has been repeatedly jailed for refusing to wear clothes. Directly he is released from jail he strips off again, and is often rearrested in the jail parking lot. He will probably spend the rest of his life in jail, for refusing to interact with the justice system.
Is throwing him in jail solving the problem?
Sounds like someone that needs help, not punishment.
Well, according to you, they should lose their license. I agree with that.
Sucks for them. Good thing we are not punishing them with a fine though!
No, according to me, someone who is posing a danger to the public should lose their license. That is different from someone who is overly targeted by police due to their demographics.
Oh yeah, I was busy earlier, so I didn’t get to it. That was a follow up question to the question that I asked a few times.
What do you think should be done with a person who gets one minor traffic ticket, but cannot afford the fine or the time off from work to contest it? Should they get additional fines and other sanctions, or should a way be worked out to make sure that this traffic ticket does not cuase them far more harm than it would cause to someone of more means?
I’ve been in situations where my food budget, the closest thing I have to discretionary money, is less than $100 a month. If I had to pay such a fine, that essentially means going 2 months without food. Is that an appropriate punishment?
Are you making a positivist argument? As in, “The law is fair because it says so,” or the like?
We do change laws sometimes, and hopefully because something outside the law gives us an idea what is or is not fair.
Psychiatrists have, apparently, concluded that he is sane, just ornery.
it sound like one side of the argument is that if being responsible when caught breaking the law is to inconvenient for the person we should let them go.
I still want to know what Cheesesteak thinks should happen if someone gets numerous tickets and refuses to pay them or go to court. Should we just let them go because they’re poor?
Two scenarios:
-
Driver, as a result of the types and severity of tickets, is deemed to be a danger to others. Regardless of whether the person pays the fine or goes to court, their license should be suspended and they should be denied the opportunity to drive. If someone, rich or poor, continues to drive, it is justification for arrest, and the criminal justice system can take over. Note that this result is unrelated to whether or not the ticket is paid, or if the person went to court, if you are a dangerous driver, you should not be driving.
-
Driver is not a danger to others, but simply has unpaid tickets. The state has the ability to take civil actions to retrieve the money, garnishment of wages and tax refunds, liens, etc. This can apply to the scenario above in addition to suspending the license, if that driver hasn’t paid their fines.
What kind of traffic violations do not present a danger to others? Speeding? Failure to signal? Driving without insurance? Expired tags?
If they are unemployed, or working off the books?
Regards,
Shodan
Driving 56 in a 55. Failure to signal. Expired tags.
I can drive to the supermarket and see a dozen drivers fail to signal, or fail to completely stop at a stop sign, or drive 5mph over the limit. All of which can be traffic violations, and none of which suggest those drivers should have their licences taken away.
To reverse it, I don’t really care which violations fall into the ‘dangerous’ and ‘not dangerous’ categories, as long as every blessed driver, rich or poor, paid or unpaid, who commits the dangerous ones gets their licence revoked.
I’m also not that worried about folks who are in the direst of financial conditions being squeezed for every last penny they have to their names. Particularly not, if it means we have to use up valuable police and court resources to do it.
And how would a $200 fine hurt you worse than losing your license?
I’m just not seeing it.
That’s how it currently works; not every ticket is a misdemeanor. Stuff like parking fines are civil violations and fall under scenario 2 in most places.
The issue here is that the laws tend to view most moving violations as class C misdemeanors, which puts them on par with simple assault, public intoxication, disorderly conduct, minor theft, etc… I think the general feeling around here seems to be that they’re not even that serious.
So let’s look at it this way- if someone’s charged with assault and fails to pay their fine or show up to court, and then gets a warrant issued for their arrest and gets hauled into jail, is that reasonable? What about if they’re not able to pay their assault fine?
People do occasionally get arrested for parking tickets, here’s the first example I found.
Exactly, speeding is not assault, and it’s not petty theft. It’s something at least 95% of drivers do every single time they drive, if only momentarily. If their crime is simply not paying a bill, treat it that way, it’s a debt to be paid. If they objectively put people around them in danger, more danger than the typical driver, then I’m very supportive of punching up the response.
And if they don’t pay that debt, what should be done?
You’re missing the point- it’s not just a bill to be paid- the bill itself is the penalty for the crime. By not paying or showing up to court to contest the charges, you’re essentially saying you can’t be bothered to be responsible for your actions one way or another, and that you don’t care what the law says.
Now why something like a speeding ticket is a class C misdemeanor and not a civil penalty like a parking ticket I don’t know. (that’s ultimately what’s at issue here)
But I do understand why the justice system reacts as they do to unpaid tickets when they’re misdemeanor tickets.