http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10960230
Swede faces world-record $1m speeding penalty
The Swede was driving a Mercedes SLS AMG - which has a top speed of 317km/h A Swedish motorist caught driving at 290km/h (180mph) in Switzerland could be given a world-record speeding fine of SFr1.08m ($1m; ?656,000), prosecutors say.
The 37-year-old, who has not been named, was clocked driving his Mercedes sports car at 170km/h over the limit.
Under Swiss law, the level of fine is determined by the wealth of the driver and the speed recorded.
In January, a Swiss driver was fined $290,000 - the current world record.
Local police spokesman Benoit Dumas said of the latest case that "nothing can justify a speed of 290km/h".
"It is not controllable. It must have taken 500m to stop," he said.
The Swede's car - a Mercedes SLS AMG - has been impounded and in principle he could be forced to pay a daily fine of SFr3,600 for 300 days.
________________________________________________________________
How do you guys like this one?
Eddie, you better stay in Canada.... :evildude: :pullover:
That's a display of greed and abuse of power. It has nothing to do with traffic safety.
Quote from: James Young on August 14, 2010, 10:32:57 AM
That's a display of greed and abuse of power. It has nothing to do with traffic safety.
What do you think the penalty should be, if anything, for extremely unsafe driving?
Quote from: dazzleman on August 15, 2010, 07:09:32 PM
What do you think the penalty should be, if anything, for extremely unsafe driving?
Mandatory training at Bondurant or Skip Barber schools.
Nota bene!! Speeding is not equivalent to unsafe drinving. D-Man, that is not aimed at you because you know the truth.
Quote from: dazzleman on August 15, 2010, 07:09:32 PM
What do you think the penalty should be, if anything, for extremely unsafe driving?
A fine and loss of driving privileges (if it's bad enough) is a very good penalty, but having the fines based off of your wealth should be illegal. Punishments have to be equal across the board.
Quote from: James Young on August 15, 2010, 07:17:28 PM
Mandatory training at Bondurant or Skip Barber schools.
Nota bene!! Speeding is not equivalent ot unsafe drinving. D-Man, that is not aimed at your because you know the truth.
I understand that. Speeding can be perfect safe, but some level of speeding is very unsafe. It depends on circumstances.
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 15, 2010, 07:18:45 PM
A fine and loss of driving privileges (if it's bad enough) is a very good penalty, but having the fines based off of your wealth should be illegal. Punishments have to be equal across the board.
You could argue it either way. Does a $500 fine have an equal impact on a dude making $1 million per year as it does on somebody making $50,000 per year? You could argue that making the fines 'equal' rather than regressive means pegging them to income. I'm not necessarily arguing that point, but there's some validity to it.
I also think that for more serious offenses, people should give up their time, not just their money. For busy people, time is at a premium and for me at least, being forced to spend my leisure time doing community service would be more of a deterrent than even a heavy fine. But of course, that wouldn't bring in revenue, so I'm sure it wouldn't be widely used.
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 15, 2010, 07:18:45 PM
having the fines based off of your wealth should be illegal. Punishments have to be equal across the board.
+1.
Quote from: BimmerM3 on August 15, 2010, 07:22:52 PM
+1.
C'mon Charlie, where's your entrepreneurial spirit? Don't you want the opportunity to one day be fined $1 million for speeding like this Swedish dude? :evildude:
Quote from: dazzleman on August 15, 2010, 07:21:26 PM
You could argue it either way. Does a $500 fine have an equal impact on a dude making $1 million per year as it does on somebody making $50,000 per year? You could argue that making the fines 'equal' rather than regressive means pegging them to income. I'm not necessarily arguing that point, but there's some validity to it.
I also think that for more serious offenses, people should give up their time, not just their money. For busy people, time is at a premium and for me at least, being forced to spend my leisure time doing community service would be more of a deterrent than even a heavy fine. But of course, that wouldn't bring in revenue, so I'm sure it wouldn't be widely used.
There is some validity to varying fines while the idea is on paper. But in real life you get things like this happening.
I agree about community service for more serious offenses.
Remind me never to move to Europe. It seems everything is taxed over there. Hell, when are they going charge people for breathing air? :facepalm:
:winkguy: :lol:
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 15, 2010, 07:18:45 PM
A fine and loss of driving privileges (if it's bad enough) is a very good penalty, but having the fines based off of your wealth should be illegal. Punishments have to be equal across the board.
I disagree. A $300 ticket is nothing to Bill Gates. The point of tickets is to deter people from "unsafe" :rolleyes: driving. $300 is enough to scare me away, but for Bill Gates, no big deal.
Regardless, going 180 mph in a SLS AMG is awesome, and I hope he gets out of it somehow. :lol:
I agree. There is a good reason behind this....someone who is buying an SLS or a Phantom isn't really going to care about a $5,000 ticket. Make it hurt.
Taxes are progressive, I don't see why tickets should be otherwise. I hate to use a liberal catch phrase....but it is the fair thing to do...IMO.
Punishments should not be based off of your social/financial standing.
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 16, 2010, 06:42:46 PM
Punishments should not be based off of your social/financial standing.
I would agree to a point. After a certain speed, it should be financially dependent. A rich guy shouldn't be overly punished for going 10-15 mph over the limit, but if he's going way over the limit, he should be fined much harder than a poor guy going that speed.
Quote from: thecarnut on August 16, 2010, 06:45:25 PM
I would agree to a point. After a certain speed, it should be financially dependent. A rich guy shouldn't be overly punished for going 10-15 mph over the limit, but if he's going way over the limit, he should be fined much harder than a poor guy going that speed.
If you can't do the time, don't the crime.
The poor guy shouldn't be going way over the limit if he can't afford the fine.
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 16, 2010, 06:53:18 PM
If you can't do the time, don't the crime.
The poor guy shouldn't be going way over the limit if he can't afford the fine.
OK, so say they both get fined $10000 for excessive speeding.
Do you think the rich guy will even flinch at that much money? Why shouldn't he get fined more?
Quote from: thecarnut on August 16, 2010, 06:57:59 PM
OK, so say they both get fined $10000 for excessive speeding.
Do you think the rich guy will even flinch at that much money? Why shouldn't he get fined more?
Why should he? Should rich people pay more for milk at the super market too?
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 16, 2010, 07:14:33 PM
Why should he? Should rich people pay more for milk at the super market too?
:facepalm:
Speeding tickets are supposed to discourage you from speeding. Comparing it to milk is not the same thing.
Bigger fines just mean the government gets more money. If you want to prevent speeding, that's what the point system is for.
Wow of all the places to pick to speed... he picks car hating Switzerland.
180 mph is only safe under very, very limited conditions. At a minimum, seize and destroy the car.
Quote from: TBR on August 16, 2010, 10:52:35 PM
180 mph is only safe under very, very limited conditions. At a minimum, seize and destroy the car.
Destroy a new SLS? :cry:
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 16, 2010, 10:57:29 PM
Destroy a new SLS? :cry:
I don't like to be killed.
Obviously this would be pending a trial, but those speeds are very dangerous.
Quote from: TBR on August 16, 2010, 11:02:39 PM
I don't like to be killed.
Obviously this would be pending a trial, but those speeds are very dangerous.
ok
Just sell it. :huh:
Quote from: BENZ BOY15 on August 16, 2010, 05:36:33 PM
I agree. There is a good reason behind this....someone who is buying an SLS or a Phantom isn't really going to care about a $5,000 ticket. Make it hurt.
Taxes are progressive, I don't see why tickets should be otherwise. I hate to use a liberal catch phrase....but it is the fair thing to do...IMO.
Fair is treating everyone equally. Don't use one morally wrong action to justify another.
Quote from: TBR on August 16, 2010, 10:52:35 PM
180 mph is only safe under very, very limited conditions. At a minimum, seize and destroy the car.
Destroy? Why not sell for municipal proceeds?
Quote from: hotrodalex on August 16, 2010, 06:42:46 PM
Punishments should not be based off of your social/financial standing.
I believe they should be for speeding. Someone who makes $500,000 a year isn't going to care about a $500 ticket, but someone who makes $20,000 probably will.
Therefore, people that make a lot of money won't really care. But they should.
Quote from: TBR on August 16, 2010, 10:52:35 PM
180 mph is only safe under very, very limited conditions. At a minimum, seize and destroy the car.
I agree. Except seize and sell it and give the proceeds to orphans.
I think Joe is making a joke. Or trying to, anyway.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 16, 2010, 04:47:18 AM
Remind me never to move to Europe. It seems everything is taxed over there. Hell, when are they going charge people for breathing air? :facepalm:
:winkguy: :lol:
Soon enough, soon enough, remember, CO2 is considered pollution now. And when you breath, you emit CO2, so eventually, they'll tax you for polluting.