5 ms·

> Even speeding tickets or anything most normal people would find a burden are nothing to super rich. I'm not sure how it works in your country but in the UK t

by tomxor 8y ago

> Even speeding tickets or anything most normal people would find a burden are nothing to super rich. I'm not sure how it works in your country but in the UK too many speeding tickets and you will loose your license. The exact number depends on the severity of each offence, but we get max of 12 points over 3 years [1] so they stick with you - repeat offenders are given even stricter rules after getting their license back. I get a sinister smile when observing rich people in those big shiny 4x4s on some stretches of motorway I know are littered with speed traps... It's a funny equaliser - I do the limit, but those types of people always gota be in front of someone with a shitter car - but the regret is apparent in their latent brake lights after the flash. [1] https://www.gov.uk/driving-disqualifications https://www.gov.uk/driving-disqualifications It's a shame this type of law that equalises wealth isn't more common, for instance in a related matter - I've heard plenty of stories about rich people basically using parking fines as parking tickets, there doesn't seem to be a limit or anything beyond a monetary disincentive. It's also more common to see expensive cars parked in places they shouldn't be, and i'm convinced this is the reason.

klodolph 8y ago
In the US it depends on the state. Most states have a point system like you describe, except some states don’t (Hawaii, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wyoming don’t).
Amezarak 8y ago
Is that really equalized? Poor people are much more severely impacted by a loss of their license than rich people. Outside cities, for example, your driver's license is pretty intimately connected to your livelihood. I imagine this is why so many people get busted for driving with a suspended or no license. They have to get to work reliably and at a specific time, or they don't get paid. They have to pick up and drop off their kids. A rich man can just get a driver, take an Uber, etc., and is not likely to be fired for being late, assuming he works.
- tomxor 8y ago
  If they don't care about driving and they were being a shit driver then didn't the law also work? either they are forced to drive like less of an idiot or they don't drive... I don't really care if they get a professional driver - good, less dead people on the road.
  - Amezarak 8y ago
    Right, but then you're worried about getting bad drivers off the road, not proportionate impact. For a poor person, losing their license (and not continuing to drive anyway) is devastating and can mean the impossibility of keeping a job or even raising their kids. For a rich person, it just means they can't enjoy the pleasure of driving themselves around. You were talking about equalized impact to start with, I really don't see how this is a good example. > If they don't care about driving and they were being a shit driver These are also pretty big assumptions. I assume because of my demographic category, the times I was driving, and my car, several years ago, I received nearly two dozen tickets in a five-year period. None of the offenses were for speeding, but for various infractions like not coming to a complete stop (I was absolutely positive in every case that I did, especially after #3 or so I got paranoid about it), failure to yield, etc. The only reason I have a license today is because I had a professional job, which allowed me the free time to go to court every single time without losing money and fight the ticket. I won every single time. Most people don't even know you can do that, they think you have to pay the fine. If I had lost my license, I ultimately would have lost even that job. I would have to work remotely.
    - tomxor 8y ago
      > You were talking about equalized impact to start with, I really don't see how this is a good example. I am _not_ talking about equalised impact i'm talking about equalised results... the OP was suggesting that speed tickets don't stop rich people from speeding, but if you loose your license it does - that is the purpose of these laws, not to try to figure out how much punishment to deal out in relation to your personal wealth, punishment is a means to an end, not an end in itself - the end being to stop you from doing something damaging to society, in this case endangering other people's lives. Taking away licences is an equaliser in this respect, because being rich doesn't give you more points to spend. Licenses are for individuals, if some rich person wants to pay some _other_ individual who can actually keep their license that is fine, the law won because a safer person is driving.
astura 8y ago
So? What is stopping someone who loses their license from just driving anyway? They've already shown not to give a shit, so they'll continue driving without a license. My dad lost his license many years ago and never stopped driving. He gets arrested once in a while, doesn't stop him.
- celticninja 8y ago
  Then your father is a selfish individual. If he isn't licensed then he isn't insured. If he caused an accident, even without causing injury or death, he could still make someone else's life incredibly difficult.
  - astura 8y ago
    Yes, my dad is a horrible person,I thought I was extremely clear about that. Other family members I know who have lost their license, it's stopped extractly zero people from driving. If you don't care about the other laws enough to get caught breaking them enough to lose your license you don't care about breaking "no driving without a license" law.
  - occamrazor 8y ago
    Not sure in which country you live. Since the GP talks about the UK, It is good to remid that in the EU/EFTA victims of traffic accident are always entitled to compensation from a state fund, even if the driver or the vehicle is uninsured.
    - astura 8y ago
      In the US many people purchase uninsured/underinsured motorist policies to protect themselves.
    - celticninja 8y ago
      Yes but you know who pays that for fund? Everyone who pays for insurance.
      - 8y ago
arethuza 8y ago
Around here in this part of Scotland it is mostly average speed cameras - I am amazed at the number of people who don't seem to have grasped what this means and slow down at the cameras (which are very visible) only to speed up afterwards.
- tomxor 8y ago
  We have some of those down here too but not many, they do make more sense - I see the same thing though, people slowing down and speeding up after the cameras, i think they just don't read - their loss.

by tomxor 8y ago

klodolph 8y ago

In the US it depends on the state. Most states have a point system like you describe, except some states don’t (Hawaii, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wyoming don’t).

Amezarak 8y ago

Is that really equalized? Poor people are much more severely impacted by a loss of their license than rich people. Outside cities, for example, your driver's license is pretty intimately connected to your livelihood. I imagine this is why so many people get busted for driving with a suspended or no license. They have to get to work reliably and at a specific time, or they don't get paid. They have to pick up and drop off their kids. A rich man can just get a driver, take an Uber, etc., and is not likely to be fired for being late, assuming he works.

tomxor 8y ago
If they don't care about driving and they were being a shit driver then didn't the law also work? either they are forced to drive like less of an idiot or they don't drive... I don't really care if they get a professional driver - good, less dead people on the road.
- Amezarak 8y ago
  Right, but then you're worried about getting bad drivers off the road, not proportionate impact. For a poor person, losing their license (and not continuing to drive anyway) is devastating and can mean the impossibility of keeping a job or even raising their kids. For a rich person, it just means they can't enjoy the pleasure of driving themselves around. You were talking about equalized impact to start with, I really don't see how this is a good example. > If they don't care about driving and they were being a shit driver These are also pretty big assumptions. I assume because of my demographic category, the times I was driving, and my car, several years ago, I received nearly two dozen tickets in a five-year period. None of the offenses were for speeding, but for various infractions like not coming to a complete stop (I was absolutely positive in every case that I did, especially after #3 or so I got paranoid about it), failure to yield, etc. The only reason I have a license today is because I had a professional job, which allowed me the free time to go to court every single time without losing money and fight the ticket. I won every single time. Most people don't even know you can do that, they think you have to pay the fine. If I had lost my license, I ultimately would have lost even that job. I would have to work remotely.
  - tomxor 8y ago
    > You were talking about equalized impact to start with, I really don't see how this is a good example. I am _not_ talking about equalised impact i'm talking about equalised results... the OP was suggesting that speed tickets don't stop rich people from speeding, but if you loose your license it does - that is the purpose of these laws, not to try to figure out how much punishment to deal out in relation to your personal wealth, punishment is a means to an end, not an end in itself - the end being to stop you from doing something damaging to society, in this case endangering other people's lives. Taking away licences is an equaliser in this respect, because being rich doesn't give you more points to spend. Licenses are for individuals, if some rich person wants to pay some _other_ individual who can actually keep their license that is fine, the law won because a safer person is driving.

astura 8y ago

So? What is stopping someone who loses their license from just driving anyway? They've already shown not to give a shit, so they'll continue driving without a license. My dad lost his license many years ago and never stopped driving. He gets arrested once in a while, doesn't stop him.

celticninja 8y ago
Then your father is a selfish individual. If he isn't licensed then he isn't insured. If he caused an accident, even without causing injury or death, he could still make someone else's life incredibly difficult.
- astura 8y ago
  Yes, my dad is a horrible person,I thought I was extremely clear about that. Other family members I know who have lost their license, it's stopped extractly zero people from driving. If you don't care about the other laws enough to get caught breaking them enough to lose your license you don't care about breaking "no driving without a license" law.
- occamrazor 8y ago
  Not sure in which country you live. Since the GP talks about the UK, It is good to remid that in the EU/EFTA victims of traffic accident are always entitled to compensation from a state fund, even if the driver or the vehicle is uninsured.
  - astura 8y ago
    In the US many people purchase uninsured/underinsured motorist policies to protect themselves.
  - celticninja 8y ago
    Yes but you know who pays that for fund? Everyone who pays for insurance.
    - 8y ago

arethuza 8y ago

Around here in this part of Scotland it is mostly average speed cameras - I am amazed at the number of people who don't seem to have grasped what this means and slow down at the cameras (which are very visible) only to speed up afterwards.

tomxor 8y ago
We have some of those down here too but not many, they do make more sense - I see the same thing though, people slowing down and speeding up after the cameras, i think they just don't read - their loss.