6 ms·

> but I'm guessing that I'm going to think it is too low when I hear the actual fine > [...] > I received 2 citations with each carrying a $500 fine. A $1000

by p-e-w 3y ago

> but I'm guessing that I'm going to think it is too low when I hear the actual fine > [...] > I received 2 citations with each carrying a $500 fine. A $1000 fine in the absence of any actual damage is completely insane and potentially life-altering for low-income people. I cannot imagine what would make you think such a fine is "too low". I guess this is what happens when people are raised in a society where crippling punishments for slight offenses are the norm, as long as the offender is a person and not a corporation or government institution.

dylan604 3y ago
the $500 fine was the max allowed. when i appeared in court, they presented me the with the max and threat of jail time in the hopes i would provide information in trade for a reduction. there's a whole lot more to the situation that i'm not going into in a public forum, so you can continue to ponder the situation like you know everything. based on the max fines being $500 for the tickets i received, i would absolutely hope that some idiot throwing a lit cigarette to the ground in a national park would be hit with a maximum fine as well. at this point, i wouldn't mind living in whatever cotton candy land you live in where a lit cigarette starting a forest fire than burns down half the state is a "slight offense". "potentially life-altering for low-income people" means nothing to me in this regard when other people can lose their home or worse because someone can't be bothered to put out their cancer stick.
- DangitBobby 3y ago
  They were saying you were fined egregiously for a slight offense, not that tossing a lit cigarette would be. I tend to agree, potentially $1000 for accidentally attending an unpermitted event is an absolutely bonkers amount, even as a theoretical max.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    You're totally reading stuff into this that's not accurate. I have no idea where you get the concept I accidentally attended anything. I never said that I was ticketed for attending the event. From the views of the rangers, I was an active participant. The rangers originally planned to hit me with way more severe charges than a couple of tickets, but after a rational conversation with them, they realized I was not in charge. A bit of advice, don't look like you're in charge when the cops show up.
    - DangitBobby 3y ago
      > I know that I found myself in a conversation with a ranger when I found out I was participating in an non-permitted event (even though I was explicitly told otherwise) This is what I read. You didn't know you were attending a non-permitted event (I.e., "accidentally attended an unpermitted event"). Obviously you knew you were in attendance, but not that the event wasn't allowed, just like you said. Not sure how I could possibly be "reading into", sounds like I got it exactly right. I also understood from your original telling that the ranger knew you had no idea what was going on. It's more alarming that the organizers got more severe punishment than you, not less. Nothing you've said makes a max $1k fine less insane.
      - dylan604 3y ago
        Attending the event and participating are two different concepts that I think you are trying to conflate as being the same. The people attending the event were told to pack up their stuff and leave. None of them were stopped or questioned. I was not one of them. Because I was not one of those attendees that left, by the ranger's logic, I must be involved in putting the event together. Because I'm a sucker and tried to help others, it gave the impression I was in charge. As you can tell, I'm intentionally not going into the minute details. I'm not Sam Bankman-Friedman talking about a criminal case that I had to deal with. It is however something that I do now have a personal experience with fines from the breaking the rules in a national park. If the fines the fines for tossing a lit cigarette that could burn down the state are not at least in the vicinity of what I faced for a trivial offense, I will be very unhappy. This is well past where I've wanted to take this, and I'll take it no futher
Elyra 3y ago
I agree with not trying to over penalize low income people in the absence of damage, but I think the other purpose is to act as a sort of insurance for the ones that were unlucky where the same act did cause damage larger than they can afford to cover.

by p-e-w 3y ago

dylan604 3y ago

the $500 fine was the max allowed. when i appeared in court, they presented me the with the max and threat of jail time in the hopes i would provide information in trade for a reduction. there's a whole lot more to the situation that i'm not going into in a public forum, so you can continue to ponder the situation like you know everything. based on the max fines being $500 for the tickets i received, i would absolutely hope that some idiot throwing a lit cigarette to the ground in a national park would be hit with a maximum fine as well. at this point, i wouldn't mind living in whatever cotton candy land you live in where a lit cigarette starting a forest fire than burns down half the state is a "slight offense". "potentially life-altering for low-income people" means nothing to me in this regard when other people can lose their home or worse because someone can't be bothered to put out their cancer stick.

DangitBobby 3y ago
They were saying you were fined egregiously for a slight offense, not that tossing a lit cigarette would be. I tend to agree, potentially $1000 for accidentally attending an unpermitted event is an absolutely bonkers amount, even as a theoretical max.
- dylan604 3y ago
  You're totally reading stuff into this that's not accurate. I have no idea where you get the concept I accidentally attended anything. I never said that I was ticketed for attending the event. From the views of the rangers, I was an active participant. The rangers originally planned to hit me with way more severe charges than a couple of tickets, but after a rational conversation with them, they realized I was not in charge. A bit of advice, don't look like you're in charge when the cops show up.
  - DangitBobby 3y ago
    > I know that I found myself in a conversation with a ranger when I found out I was participating in an non-permitted event (even though I was explicitly told otherwise) This is what I read. You didn't know you were attending a non-permitted event (I.e., "accidentally attended an unpermitted event"). Obviously you knew you were in attendance, but not that the event wasn't allowed, just like you said. Not sure how I could possibly be "reading into", sounds like I got it exactly right. I also understood from your original telling that the ranger knew you had no idea what was going on. It's more alarming that the organizers got more severe punishment than you, not less. Nothing you've said makes a max $1k fine less insane.
    - dylan604 3y ago
      Attending the event and participating are two different concepts that I think you are trying to conflate as being the same. The people attending the event were told to pack up their stuff and leave. None of them were stopped or questioned. I was not one of them. Because I was not one of those attendees that left, by the ranger's logic, I must be involved in putting the event together. Because I'm a sucker and tried to help others, it gave the impression I was in charge. As you can tell, I'm intentionally not going into the minute details. I'm not Sam Bankman-Friedman talking about a criminal case that I had to deal with. It is however something that I do now have a personal experience with fines from the breaking the rules in a national park. If the fines the fines for tossing a lit cigarette that could burn down the state are not at least in the vicinity of what I faced for a trivial offense, I will be very unhappy. This is well past where I've wanted to take this, and I'll take it no futher

Elyra 3y ago

I agree with not trying to over penalize low income people in the absence of damage, but I think the other purpose is to act as a sort of insurance for the ones that were unlucky where the same act did cause damage larger than they can afford to cover.