3 ms·

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 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.

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.