[–] [deleted] 4 points 19 points 23 points (+23|-4) ago
Speeding camera should be illegal to begin with as they do not stop the offense only punish it weeks later. And the fines are meant to be a deterrent. For me $300 sucks but it is not going to hurt really do I don't much care about getting caught speeding. If it were $1500 then I would not speed ever.
I do agree how it would change things though since our government is corrupt. I like the idea in principle, but in reality it would be abused so I think I agree that it should not happen.
[–] Gake_The_Cake 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago (edited ago)
I disagree with you on equitable speeding fines.
The intent of fines is the emotional impact on the person in order to teach someone that what they're doing is wrong. If less than 1% of your income is absorbed by it you won't think twice about it- you'll just do it again. If 50% is taken you feel it desperately.
Your argument is utter bullshit. Fines are not taxes. You might be able to successfully argue that they shouldn't pay higher taxes, but don't be stupid and think for a second that fines are anything similar. They may as well not even fine them if your argument is to be accepted since they don't feel the punishment whatsoever.
Your structure of the argument reveals how incredibly ineffective non-scaling fines actually is since it doesn't even occur to you in your argument that you're not even supposed to be fined whatsoever. EVER. If you are fined for something then you're a horrible fucking person who deserves to struggle for a time. Fines are awarded to CRIMINALS not every rich person should get fined. In fact, in a perfect society, no-one would ever get fined because they're doing the right thing.
If they rich want to avoid paying high fines then maybe they should follow the fucking law like everyone else. This is how you tell you have a corrupt as shit society when the rich just want to go on breaking the law by simply dolling out a "allow me to do more shit" tax.
[–] MinorLeakage ago (edited ago)
Well like you mentioned yourself, higher earners already pay a higher percentage of their income. That is unfair. Everyone should pay the same % tax, in my opinion. However, it should definitely be a % and not a flat $ value.
I'm suggesting the same flat % for everyone, which wouldn't be unfair, unlike income tax. It's not a further punishment, it's the SAME punishment.
The second part you mention, about targeting wealthy areas, actually would be a concern. You would have to find a way to make sure that money wasn't being put in to the police budget, or a politician's budget. But now that you mention it, it's probably already happening. It's probably much more likely a wealthier person would simply pay the fine. And likely a poorer person would do their 30 days in jail instead, thus costing the town/city/state even more $. Though, people in prison justify the need for police, so maybe just middle class folks will be left alone.
Anyways, it was meant to be more a comment on equity than on speeding specifically. Thanks for the reply though!
EDIT: missing word
[–] [deleted] 5 points 11 points 16 points (+16|-5) ago
[–] sleazyridr 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
That sounds like a good idea, but noone thinks that they might crash. I like the philosophy of letting people do what they want as long as they don't hurt other people, but most of the population has very poor risk assessment skills, and can't really comprehend the impacts of their actions.
[–] CrazyInAnInsaneWorld 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Ehhh, "Attempted Murder" implies Rens Mea, or rather, the intent to murder. I can swing for the harsher penalties for those that cause accidents while speeding, in lieu of regular speeding fines, but how would you go about enforcing it? I could even go for just enforcing speeding tickets in certain areas (School Zones are such an area that immediately come to mind), but charging for attempted murder, which implies an active desire to murder someone, as a prerequisite for the charge, because of an accident? Nothing about that speaks to the idea of 'justice', in my analysis.
[–] [deleted] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
[–] MinorLeakage ago
It's how taxes and everything else already works. And I'm not suggesting a higher percentage for anybody. Just the same flat % for all.
[–] WarGy 1 point 4 points 5 points (+5|-1) ago
That's completely ignoring what a speeding fine is though. Speeding fines don't make anyone safer, the only thing they do is provide funding to the local police department. The only thing equitable speeding fines would cause is the police to give more tickets to people in expensive cars to get more money out of them.
[–] AlphaWookie 3 points 2 points 5 points (+5|-3) ago
Wrong, insurance companies study this you know because they have to pay up for accidents speeding fines reduce the overall number of traffic accidents, the severity of traffic accidents, and the number of fatalities from traffic accidents. So stop pulling shit out of your ass and come with sources next time faggot.
Source: https://economics.missouri.edu/working-papers/2011/wp1117_leedn.pdf
[–] WarGy 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
Okay, here's a source: https://www.motorists.org/blog/speed-limits-slower-safer/
Some prudent quotes:
Also, look at some safety statistics on the German Autobahn, a highway system without a speed limit:
This all comes together to show that speed limits, and hence speeding fines, only make roads more dangerous. Whereas a speed limitless road forces people to observe prevailing driving conditions and other cars' speed, the speed limit divides cars into two separate speed groups causing people to have more crashes.
[–] 51rH0n3y84d93r 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Generalization may be fair to question.
No analysis on remote enforcement such as rural highways. IE: The increase in accidents for Montana following the posting of daylight speed limits. I wouldn't consider this conclusive evidence.
[–] lucifirius ago
That escalated rather quickly.