This weekend our traffic enforcement

[dazzleman]

The more I think about this, the more I realize that with Randy, police work was his salvation.  Police officers have been his only family for most of his adolescent life and all of his adult life.  It only stands to reason that he would feel so strongly about protecting those he cares most about. 

The danger is in thinking that the job of being an LEO begins and ends with protecting yourself and your fellow officers.  I can see that it would be very easy to fall into this mentality, in the face of a sometimes hostile public and a dysfunctional legal system, as we have.  But it can still be dangerous to an officer's career to take that thinking too far.

[hounddog]

If the cost of a ticket was relative to my current income (ZERO), I would be fine.
When and if I ever have more money that I know what to do with, tickets will become merely a nuisance, like a housefly. I will squash them! 

There is a saying that was around when I started; If you can't afford the ticket, you can't afford to speed.

[dazzleman]

There are many laws that bother me more than speed limits, or traffic laws in general... but this being a car forum and all, that's just what I happen to bitch about most of the time.

Think about the Duke students falsely charged with rape with all the national publicity that went this that.  That is the result of the power we have given to feminazis and racial arsonists.

So which do you find more disturbing -- the possibility of getting a speeding ticket that is technically legitimate, or facing something like that?

Situations like the Duke one make me far more angry than getting popped for speeding when I'm doing 20+ mph over the speed limit.

[hounddog]

The danger is in thinking that the job of being an LEO begins and ends with protecting yourself and your fellow officers.  I can see that it would be very easy to fall into this mentality, in the face of a sometimes hostile public and a dysfunctional legal system, as we have.  But it can still be dangerous to an officer's career to take that thinking too far.

Well, actually, it does begine and end with that.  WE are more important than anyone else, we have to be but only because of survival instincts.  Our #1 job as patrol officers is to protect each other before anything else.

Sorry, I posted that accidentally before I was done.

But, we fully understand the dangers of our job.  We fully understand that sometimes the wolf kills the sheepdog.  It is just part of the game.

[Eye of the Tiger]

There is a saying that was around when I started; If you can't afford the ticket, you can't afford to speed.

I know that saying, and I don't even agree with the concept that rich people should pay higher fines than poor people... I'm just saying that, because I'm poor, it pisses me off when something that I don't feel like I deserved can completely throw off my finances and force me to create food from merely flour, water and cheese powder for several days before my next paycheck (true story).

[dazzleman]

Well, actually, it does begine and end with that.  WE are more important than anyone else, we have to be but only because of survival instincts.  Our #1 job as patrol officers is to protect each other before anything else.

There's where I don't agree with you.

If your only job were to protect yourself, there'd be no reason for a police force at all.  You've apparently fallen into the thinking exhibited by the teachers' unions, that the schools are run to give them jobs rather than to educate.

Protecting each other is certain an important part of the LEO job, but that has to fall within the context of protecting the law abiding public (who pay the LEO salaries).

[hounddog]

There's where I don't agree with you.

If your only job were to protect yourself, there'd be no reason for a police force at all.  You've apparently fallen into the thinking exhibited by the teachers' unions, that the schools are run to give them jobs rather than to educate.

Protecting each other is certain an important part of the LEO job, but that has to fall within the context of protecting the law abiding public (who pay the LEO salaries).

I accidentally posted that before I finished, there is a little more.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Think about the Duke students falsely charged with rape with all the national publicity that went this that.  That is the result of the power we have given to feminazis and racial arsonists.

So which do you find more disturbing -- the possibility of getting a speeding ticket that is technically legitimate, or facing something like that?

Situations like the Duke one make me far more angry than getting popped for speeding when I'm doing 20+ mph over the speed limit.

I was agreeing with your point. I was just saying I bitch about traffic laws here because this is a traffic law forum.

[dazzleman]

I know that saying, and I don't even agree with the concept that rich people should pay higher fines than poor people... I'm just saying that, because I'm poor, it pisses me off when something that I don't feel like I deserved can completely throw off my finances and force me to create food from merely flour, water and cheese powder for several days before my next paycheck (true story).

That's how you know punishment is effective -- when it hurts in some way.

I have always enjoyed pushing limits and even on some level getting busted, so long as the penalty was fairly small.  I've always been emboldened by punishment that didn't hurt (and I've gotten a fair amount of that).

[dazzleman]

I was agreeing with your point. I was just saying I bitch about traffic laws here because this is a traffic law forum.

I think it's good to keep these things in perspective.

[dazzleman]

I accidentally posted that before I finished, there is a little more.

Let's hear the rest of it, man....

[Eye of the Tiger]

That's how you know punishment is effective -- when it hurts in some way.

Yup. That's why I didn't start speeding again until my next paycheck.

[hounddog]

I was agreeing with your point. I was just saying I bitch about traffic laws here because this is a traffic law forum.

W

I know that saying, and I don't even agree with the concept that rich people should pay higher fines than poor people... I'm just saying that, because I'm poor, it pisses me off when something that I don't feel like I deserved can completely throw off my finances and force me to create food from merely flour, water and cheese powder for several days before my next paycheck (true story).

Our train tracks run parallel but almost never touch.  Where we come together is how traffic violations are enforced.  It is my absolute belief that fines should be set accordingly to how much a person makes.  It is the only way to make it fair and balanced.  If you make $5,000 a year, your fines at $25 would have exactly the same impact on you as compared to $150.  Only, they would seem more reasonable to you, where as a man making $350,000 should pay something like $2,500 for a similar infraction.

[hounddog]

Let's hear the rest of it, man....

I added it to that post.

[dazzleman]

Yup. That's why I didn't start speeding again until my next paycheck.

I like the way you think.....

When I was in high school, I followed the 'decent interval' theory on getting in trouble.  If my friends wanted to cut out of a Friday afternoon class to go drinking or something like that, I wouldn't do it if I'd been busted for it in the last couple of weeks.  But once that 'decent interval' was over, I was game again....

[hounddog]

I wonder, did Randy imagine his post trying to proove a point about revenue gain would turn into such a good topic debate spanning such broad ground?

 
Getting aweful tired guys.  Plus, my Spartans are on in an hour.  Have a great Saturday.

[dazzleman]

WOur train tracks run parallel but almost never touch.  Where we come together is how traffic violations are enforced.  It is my absolute belief that fines should be set accordingly to how much a person makes.  It is the only way to make it fair and balanced.  If you make $5,000 a year, your fines at $25 would have exactly the same impact on you as compared to $150.  Only, they would seem more reasonable to you, where as a man making $350,000 should pay something like $2,500 for a similar infraction.

Finland actually has a system like that, where traffic fines are tied to income.

It would probably be a nightmare to implement, but it does make some sense.

In reality, though, there's so much variation among people as to what it will take to change their behavior.  Different people respond to different types and levels of punishment.  What doesn't bother some people is very painful to others.  So even with a graduated system of fines based upon income, the effect is not going to be uniform across the spectrum.

[Raghavan]

WOur train tracks run parallel but almost never touch.  Where we come together is how traffic violations are enforced.  It is my absolute belief that fines should be set accordingly to how much a person makes.  It is the only way to make it fair and balanced.  If you make $5,000 a year, your fines at $25 would have exactly the same impact on you as compared to $150.  Only, they would seem more reasonable to you, where as a man making $350,000 should pay something like $2,500 for a similar infraction.

So if i was caught speeding i wouldn't get a ticket?

[Eye of the Tiger]

So if i was caught speeding i wouldn't get a ticket?

You would get a ticket for $.01, but I recommend that you go to court and contest it.

[hounddog]

Finland actually has a system like that, where traffic fines are tied to income.

It would probably be a nightmare to implement, but it does make some sense.

In reality, though, there's so much variation among people as to what it will take to change their behavior.  Different people respond to different types and levels of punishment.  What doesn't bother some people is very painful to others.  So even with a graduated system of fines based upon income, the effect is not going to be uniform across the spectrum.

Last post of the day.

True.  However, at least it would be fair.  I just do not see punishing a good kid/college student with exactly the same fines as someone working and making several hundred thousand dollars a year.  I guess that is the one liberal thing left in me, punishment should be fair and equitable across the board.  Doubly so when it comes to monetary punishment.  To me "reasonable income based fines" would be vastly more effective than changing the entire system of enforcement.

[hounddog]

So if i was caught speeding i wouldn't get a ticket?

Ok, THIS is my last post of the day.

I do not know how to address kids still in school/dependant of parents.  Maybe and automatic suspension for say 5 weeks for simple 10-20 over, and then it would become exponentially longer periods for every violation thereafter?  Just throwing out some possibilities.

[Raza]

That's not the case at all.

I just think that if a law is so objectionable, we should fight to change it, rather than just break it and then bitch about getting busted on a forum.

In my hierarchy of things that really bother me, I put speed enforcement pretty low in the pecking order.  Just as a small example, I find feminazi control of the family courts much more disturbing, even though it has yet to affect me directly.

The problem with being logical and intelligent is that everyone else is illogical and unintelligent.  Majority rule has the weakness of relying on the majority when the minority is often better suited for the job. 

[Raza]

Think about the Duke students falsely charged with rape with all the national publicity that went this that.  That is the result of the power we have given to feminazis and racial arsonists.

So which do you find more disturbing -- the possibility of getting a speeding ticket that is technically legitimate, or facing something like that?

Situations like the Duke one make me far more angry than getting popped for speeding when I'm doing 20+ mph over the speed limit.

Just because one situation is more wrong than another doesn't mean one isn't wrong. 

[Raghavan]

Ok, THIS is my last post of the day.

I do not know how to address kids still in school/dependant of parents.  Maybe and automatic suspension for say 5 weeks for simple 10-20 over, and then it would become exponentially longer periods for every violation thereafter?  Just throwing out some possibilities.

I'd give up my license for a month or so instead of a speeding ticket (provided i get no points of course).

[J86]

  I just do not see punishing a good kid/college student with exactly the same fines as someone working and making several hundred thousand dollars a year. 

Thanks!

[Raza]

Finland actually has a system like that, where traffic fines are tied to income.

It would probably be a nightmare to implement, but it does make some sense.

In reality, though, there's so much variation among people as to what it will take to change their behavior.  Different people respond to different types and levels of punishment.  What doesn't bother some people is very painful to others.  So even with a graduated system of fines based upon income, the effect is not going to be uniform across the spectrum.

No, it doesn't.  You can't punish someone for being financially successful.  It's fucking retarded.

[J86]

No, it doesn't.  You can't punish someone for being financially successful.  It's fucking retarded.

Whereas under the current system, it acts as a regressive tax because it hits poor people the hardest./

[Raza]

Ok, THIS is my last post of the day.

I do not know how to address kids still in school/dependant of parents.  Maybe and automatic suspension for say 5 weeks for simple 10-20 over, and then it would become exponentially longer periods for every violation thereafter?  Just throwing out some possibilities.

5 weeks? 

License suspensions just lead to people driving with suspended licenses.

[dazzleman]

Last post of the day.

True.  However, at least it would be fair.  I just do not see punishing a good kid/college student with exactly the same fines as someone working and making several hundred thousand dollars a year.  I guess that is the one liberal thing left in me, punishment should be fair and equitable across the board.  Doubly so when it comes to monetary punishment.  To me "reasonable income based fines" would be vastly more effective than changing the entire system of enforcement.

I don't disagree in principle.  I just wonder if the nightmare of implementing such a thing would be worth it for such minor offenses and small amounts of money.

[The Pirate]

Finland actually has a system like that, where traffic fines are tied to income.

It would probably be a nightmare to implement, but it does make some sense.

In reality, though, there's so much variation among people as to what it will take to change their behavior.  Different people respond to different types and levels of punishment.  What doesn't bother some people is very painful to others.  So even with a graduated system of fines based upon income, the effect is not going to be uniform across the spectrum.

Not too mention that every time you get a ticket, the state in question is going to delve into your financial records to establish your income.  In my mind, that's personal information, and not any of their business, especially for the task of levying a fine.  I'm sure they have ways of getting that information anyway, but I don't want to see it done for that purpose.


And yes, count me in the group of people who can't really afford speeding tickets (NACar: it hurts, I know )

I'd rather the current system, a flat fine for each offense for everybody.