3 ms·
> If you're rich and you get fined doing well over the specified speed limit but you only have to pay at most a few hundred dollars for potentially putting som
by fancyketchup 12y ago
> If you're rich and you get fined doing well over the specified speed limit but you only have to pay at most a few hundred dollars for potentially putting someone else's life in danger, what is the deterrent?
Many US states have a system of "points," which are assigned based on the severity of the driving offense. You might hear someone say "He got three points on his license for speeding."
The points expire over time, and points can be subtracted by attending driving school (and possibly other ways, too), but there are some limits on how quickly and how many points can be expired. Accumulating too many points at one time (the limit is usually an integer in the range 5 to 10) will lead to having one's license and driving privileges revoked.
The number of points earned for drunk driving is somewhere close to the maximum (in my state), and there are more restrictions on retiring these points, so being caught driving drunk puts one perilously close to losing one's license.
I'm not sure that either income-proportionate fines or license points are better. Just different approaches to the same problem.
Edit: Actually, after thinking about this a little more, I feel that the proportionate fines are probably better. Not all states have points systems, and points generally do not transfer between states. So someone from another state could come here, be caught speeding, and not face any long-term consequence (because the points would expire before they return).
- Margh 12y agoAustralia has more or less exactly the same point system except (I think) points are nation wide. I would say that the cooldown periods are statistically forgiving though. You recover 4 points every year and most fines are 2-4 points. It's generally only pretty extreme cases (as the GP points out) that cause a license to be completely suspended (and even then it sometimes doesn't stop people driving anyway). Hence the GP (and me, personally) agreeing with income based fines as an actual deterrent.
- cnvogel 12y agoI was thinking about describing the german system, but interestingly there's a very elaborate Wikipedia article summarizing the schemes used in many countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_system_(driving) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Point_system_(driving)
- kiiski 12y agoIt's also worth remembering that Finland has, in addition to income proportional fines, a rule that three offences during a year or four during two years will lead to losing your license. And if you go too far above the speed limit, you will lose your license for <=6 months.
- masklinn 12y ago> I'm not sure that either income-proportionate fines or license points are better. Just different approaches to the same problem. Points and income-indexed fines are not exclusive. Point-based systems still include fines. The purpose of income-indexed fines is to make fines actually relevant to people with high income. Norway has a points system, and its speeding fines can go up to 10% of the annual income (plus jail time)
- frobozz 12y agoA problem with a points-only or points+trivial fine system, is that although it might scare straight a generally good driver who occasionally has a heavy foot; it only becomes a deterrent for persistent recidivists when they near the disqualification barrier. Even then, it's only a deterrent if driving whilst disqualified carries a heavy enough penalty.