5 ms·

People get tickets for violating motor vehicle laws. These laws exist to protect all users of the road. If you can't follow the rules, you don't get to operate

People get tickets for violating motor vehicle laws. These laws exist to protect all users of the road. If you can't follow the rules, you don't get to operate a vehicle that can easily kill other users. The only issue with license suspensions as a result of unpaid tickets, is that you can pay the ticket to buy your way out - an issue most places rectify by having a points system, so that drivers can't violate the law repeatedly just because they can pay. > On places people have no other ways to move around, this is a human rights violation. Nothing less. By this argument, driving tests should be illegal too. Or age limits on licensing. Or fees to renew plates or permits. If there's a "human rights violation", it's letting motorists known to repeatedly violate the law (putting my life in danger) continue to operate a vehicle.

ben0x539 3y ago
You shoulda decided whether this is a "economic sanction" infraction or a "we can't let you drive for safety reason" infraction. If you decided it's the former, you shouldn't get to change it to the latter just because it turns out the driver can't pay.
- SECProto 3y ago
  Yes, I covered that in my comment about points systems (they exist everywhere I've lived - get too many tickets and your license is suspended, regardless of if you pay it off). Unless you mean that there should be no fee to renew your license, no nandatory insurance, no gas taxes, etc?
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    Things like not having a license plate on the front wouldn't normally come with points no matter how many times you were caught.
    - SECProto 3y ago
      Yes, that is an issue and should be corrected. Every monetary penalty should also contribute towards license revocation.
      - michaelmrose 3y ago
        That is quit frankly silly penaltes should just be scaled based on income
- davkan 3y ago
  The fine is intended to curb the poor behavior. If they can’t (or won’t) pay then it seems reasonable to proceed to a different punishment to curb that behavior. I’m all for pegging fines to income to reduce the likelyhood that fines cause serious harm to violators, beyond the desired effect. But at some point it may not be possible to do anything but take a license.
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    > The fine is intended to curb the poor’s behavior. Fixed that for you.
    - davkan 3y ago
      > I’m all for pegging fines to income
- Terr_ 3y ago
  ¿Por Qué No Los Dos? You're setting up a false-dichotomy where the only valid reaction to unsafe-driving is waiting for a major disaster and then taking their license away entirely. Compare to: "OSHA shouldn't be fining MegaCo for lacking metal safety-railings around the ManMangler 4000 unit, because if it was reeeealy about safety they'd shut down the entire factory until it was safe. Fines prove they aren't serious about safety and have some other dubious motive." Fines are a totally valid way to change behavior and deter the unsafe behavior from happening again in the future. They are both adjustable and reversible, unlike imprisonment or eye-for-an-eye. While I would love to see fines scaled by wealth to avoid disproportionately severe (or ineffective) effects, that's not the same as rejecting fines entirely.
  - pierat 3y ago
    Wow, talk about taking a comment to an absurd point. If OSHA was serious about safety, they would shut the offending machine down until remedied. If there's enough problems in a facility, then they shut the whole place down. But therein lies the problem - then the employees don't get paid. The "fine" should go to the employees for endangerment and payment of lack of work. But no, fines.
    - SECProto 3y ago
      > Wow, talk about taking a comment to an absurd point. I think the one that "took a comment to an absurd point" is the one about driving being a human right.
Brian_K_White 3y ago
The safety of other people does not hinge on money, other than liability insurance. If you want to correct someone's bad or even intentionally irresponsible driving, there is nothing about the problem that implies money. In fact it's if anything, the opposite. Making the penalty for a ticket be money just means I can just pay the ticket like paying for the priviledge to ignore that rule. In fact I do this wrt to the front plate on one of my cars where it would be ugly. I don't want a plate there, but this state's rules say otherwise, but I get to just have what I want anyway. Once in a while, I get a ticket for it. I just pay it and continue not having a license plate on the front of that car. It's been over 20 years and several cars. How nice for me that the penalty for this important rule is just money!
- Terr_ 3y ago
  > I can just pay No, you've mis-identified the problem as "the punishment is only a single sum of money." What actually makes it ineffective is "it's a fixed sum which some people (like me) are rich enough to casually ignore". Compounded by "infrequent enforcement." The truth of this is easy to illustrate: Simply imagine that instead of a ~$100 fine every ~5 years, the missing plate was detected every week and the fine compounded by +5% each time until it reached 10% of your wages. It's technically still "just money"... but would your behavior be the same?
  - Brian_K_White 3y ago
    Just raises the bar. It's still a penalty that doesn't relate to the misdeed, and hurts different people differently. The problem is we use money as a form of pain, because that is one facet of it, money can sure hurt, but taking money from one person is like taking away a finger or a leg, decimating their ability to function at all things in life, and then everyone punishes that person even more, now for not being a productive contributing member of society. Meanwhile another person can supply "fingers" all day and not be even inconvenienced let alone handicapped. But taking money as a form of pain appeals to assholes, and funds their organizations, win-win!
    - 3y ago

ben0x539 3y ago

You shoulda decided whether this is a "economic sanction" infraction or a "we can't let you drive for safety reason" infraction. If you decided it's the former, you shouldn't get to change it to the latter just because it turns out the driver can't pay.

SECProto 3y ago
Yes, I covered that in my comment about points systems (they exist everywhere I've lived - get too many tickets and your license is suspended, regardless of if you pay it off). Unless you mean that there should be no fee to renew your license, no nandatory insurance, no gas taxes, etc?
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  Things like not having a license plate on the front wouldn't normally come with points no matter how many times you were caught.
  - SECProto 3y ago
    Yes, that is an issue and should be corrected. Every monetary penalty should also contribute towards license revocation.
    - michaelmrose 3y ago
      That is quit frankly silly penaltes should just be scaled based on income
davkan 3y ago
The fine is intended to curb the poor behavior. If they can’t (or won’t) pay then it seems reasonable to proceed to a different punishment to curb that behavior. I’m all for pegging fines to income to reduce the likelyhood that fines cause serious harm to violators, beyond the desired effect. But at some point it may not be possible to do anything but take a license.
- Scoundreller 3y ago
  > The fine is intended to curb the poor’s behavior. Fixed that for you.
  - davkan 3y ago
    > I’m all for pegging fines to income
Terr_ 3y ago
¿Por Qué No Los Dos? You're setting up a false-dichotomy where the only valid reaction to unsafe-driving is waiting for a major disaster and then taking their license away entirely. Compare to: "OSHA shouldn't be fining MegaCo for lacking metal safety-railings around the ManMangler 4000 unit, because if it was reeeealy about safety they'd shut down the entire factory until it was safe. Fines prove they aren't serious about safety and have some other dubious motive." Fines are a totally valid way to change behavior and deter the unsafe behavior from happening again in the future. They are both adjustable and reversible, unlike imprisonment or eye-for-an-eye. While I would love to see fines scaled by wealth to avoid disproportionately severe (or ineffective) effects, that's not the same as rejecting fines entirely.
- pierat 3y ago
  Wow, talk about taking a comment to an absurd point. If OSHA was serious about safety, they would shut the offending machine down until remedied. If there's enough problems in a facility, then they shut the whole place down. But therein lies the problem - then the employees don't get paid. The "fine" should go to the employees for endangerment and payment of lack of work. But no, fines.
  - SECProto 3y ago
    > Wow, talk about taking a comment to an absurd point. I think the one that "took a comment to an absurd point" is the one about driving being a human right.

Brian_K_White 3y ago

The safety of other people does not hinge on money, other than liability insurance. If you want to correct someone's bad or even intentionally irresponsible driving, there is nothing about the problem that implies money. In fact it's if anything, the opposite. Making the penalty for a ticket be money just means I can just pay the ticket like paying for the priviledge to ignore that rule. In fact I do this wrt to the front plate on one of my cars where it would be ugly. I don't want a plate there, but this state's rules say otherwise, but I get to just have what I want anyway. Once in a while, I get a ticket for it. I just pay it and continue not having a license plate on the front of that car. It's been over 20 years and several cars. How nice for me that the penalty for this important rule is just money!

Terr_ 3y ago
> I can just pay No, you've mis-identified the problem as "the punishment is only a single sum of money." What actually makes it ineffective is "it's a fixed sum which some people (like me) are rich enough to casually ignore". Compounded by "infrequent enforcement." The truth of this is easy to illustrate: Simply imagine that instead of a ~$100 fine every ~5 years, the missing plate was detected every week and the fine compounded by +5% each time until it reached 10% of your wages. It's technically still "just money"... but would your behavior be the same?
- Brian_K_White 3y ago
  Just raises the bar. It's still a penalty that doesn't relate to the misdeed, and hurts different people differently. The problem is we use money as a form of pain, because that is one facet of it, money can sure hurt, but taking money from one person is like taking away a finger or a leg, decimating their ability to function at all things in life, and then everyone punishes that person even more, now for not being a productive contributing member of society. Meanwhile another person can supply "fingers" all day and not be even inconvenienced let alone handicapped. But taking money as a form of pain appeals to assholes, and funds their organizations, win-win!
  - 3y ago