• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should traffic fines and other fines be based on the income the offender makes?

Should traffic fines and other fines be based on the income one makes?


  • Total voters
    76
Don't they already have a way to let old sick prisoners out to die?

Don't judges take thing like age and ability into account when sentencing?

There was an old lady, in her 80s or 90s, who lived next to Central high who got busted dealing drugs more than once. The courts didn't want to be responsible for her, so she would not get any jail time despite being a repeat offender. If she had been 25 yrsold, and healthy she would have received a different sentence. Course, she prob'ly wouldn't've been dealing if she didn't think she could get away with it.

state courts probably

federal courts-based on the PSI, the statute and the sentencing guidelines. age usually doesn't play a role

its based on

A) offense level which includes "relevant conduct" (for example if you are convicted of 3 bankrobberies but there is credible evidence you robbed 6 that can count)

B) criminal history-0 means you have no record, 2 means minor stuff-if you are up at 5 you've been a long time asshole.
 
Some Liberals are really stupid but not all. Lumping all Conservatives together might cause some to rethink who is and isn't stupid.

I could be a Gay Blackman for all you know.

I quote the general concensus.. Like most conservatives are against letting the Bush tax cuts expire.. If you have something useful to say that is actually part of the topic them please say it.. Don't try to be intelligent and moan about an accurate generality.. Most conservatives are against gay marriage and abortion becuase most conservatives are also religious.. I don't care who you are.. Who you are is irrelevent..

Some liberals are stupid.. Just as some conservatives are stupid.. So what?? Again another pointless remark on your part..

Just because I make a comment about conservatives, doesn't mean I am lumping all of anything anywhere.. You are an ignorant fool if you expect people to specificaly spell out who they are talking about.. If I were to say that all conservatives are assholes.. Well.. That might be a little different.. But I didn't say that.. A majorty by a large margin do not support abortion or gay marriage.. Your issue is what exactly?? Failure to understand basic english??

You want equality but don't even consider the inequality of income on a monetary fine or punishment.. How does one respond to that?? Did you think this through?? Please explain how it is equal punishment, when one can pay the fine without even batting an eyelash and the other may not eat for a month because of the same fine.. Who is the real unamerican here?? Who here hasn't really thought about equality??

You can rethink who is and isn't stupid all you want.. Frankly I really don't care what you think on that topic.. You would appear a lot smarter if you simply tried to respond to what others write..

Have a nice day..
 
Last edited:
What do you do with somebody that shows 0 as income for the year ( I assume you would use the last years tax return to determine income)?

He can rack up as many tickets as he wants because he pays nothing.

Is that right?

Obviously not. That wouldn't be a deterrent.

In such cases, community service would be appropriate. Since the person earns no income, and thus has no job, the amount of community service would be proportional to their estimated free time. Thus, said person would have a ****-ton of community service.
 
poor   /pʊər/ Show Spelled
[poor] Show IPA
adjective, -er, -est, noun
–adjective
1. having little or no money, goods, or other means of support: a poor family living on welfare.
2. Law . dependent upon charity or public support.
3. (of a country, institution, etc.) meagerly supplied or endowed with resources or funds.

Using that definition,

You do realize that there are three definitions there, right?

Which one would you actualy like to use, or are you ok with any one being used?
 
Afaict, we're not talking about "the rich" we're talking about law breakers who make a lot of money.

Towns would start being more discriminate in who they pull over.
Drive a Lexus, don't even go 5 over the speed limit, there is a greater incentive for the town to pull you over.

Drive a jalopy, speeding could be fine for you.
 
Towns would start being more discriminate in who they pull over.
Drive a Lexus, don't even go 5 over the speed limit, there is a greater incentive for the town to pull you over.

Drive a jalopy, speeding could be fine for you.

So? The rich can easily buy jalopies if they want to speed.

And a poor person driving a lexus would be just as likely to be pulled over as a rich person driving a lexus. There is no inequality present.
 
So? The rich can easily buy jalopies if they want to speed.

And a poor person driving a lexus would be just as likely to be pulled over as a rich person driving a lexus. There is no inequality present.

This is an easy fix: place the average ticket cost in the hand of the police treasury and the rest in some other location where the police would gain no benefit, e.g., contribute it to the government in general, or to a specific funding like roads, or healthcare etc. Additionally, if the police officer pulls a statistically significant higher number of wealthy drivers, put a penalty on that officer ... or ... make it so that the police officer can only fine a certain number of wealthy drivers .. if he goes over that limit, all other fines to the wealthy are at the average speeding ticket cost.

Many solutions to such problems. The real question is why make up unreasonable excuses for the rich to be less severely punished .... ?
 
This is an easy fix: place the average ticket cost in the hand of the police treasury and the rest in some other location where the police would gain no benefit, e.g., contribute it to the government in general, or to a specific funding like roads, or healthcare etc. Additionally, if the police officer pulls a statistically significant higher number of wealthy drivers, put a penalty on that officer ... or ... make it so that the police officer can only fine a certain number of wealthy drivers .. if he goes over that limit, all other fines to the wealthy are at the average speeding ticket cost.

Many solutions to such problems. The real question is why make up unreasonable excuses for the rich to be less severely punished .... ?

why do you spend so much time worrying about how to get more money out of the rich

speeding tickets are revenue enhancers. speeding is not inherently wrong-they are Malum prohibitum not malum per se in other words speeding is illegal because the law says it is not because it is inherently wrong (like murder, rape or armed robbery)

in fact speeding isn't even immoral. if you speed you should pay the same fine as everyone else
 
I think this is a pretty good idea. I believe there should be a minimun charge (whatever it is now), plus more depending on how wealthy the person is. It will serve as a deterrent, a proper punishment, and as an extra source of income for the government.
 
This is an easy fix: place the average ticket cost in the hand of the police treasury and the rest in some other location where the police would gain no benefit, e.g., contribute it to the government in general, or to a specific funding like roads, or healthcare etc. Additionally, if the police officer pulls a statistically significant higher number of wealthy drivers, put a penalty on that officer ... or ... make it so that the police officer can only fine a certain number of wealthy drivers .. if he goes over that limit, all other fines to the wealthy are at the average speeding ticket cost.

Many solutions to such problems. The real question is why make up unreasonable excuses for the rich to be less severely punished .... ?

There's no inequality that needs to be fixed, though. Even if we assume the hypothetical is likely (which I seriously doubt since cars in poor condition currently get pulled over more often, according to all of my cop friends, because those ar ethe cars that tend to have busted taillights, expired plates, criminal types behind the wheel, etc.), the rich would still have the option to avoid their tickets in two ways:

1. Don't speed.
2. Drive a jalopy and then speed to their hearts content.


The rich have an option available to them, whereas the poor are not. I'm sure a great many poor people would gladly trade the opportunity to go five miles over the limit in a jalopy for the income necessary to own a luxury car.

If they are pissed off that they can't speed in their lexus, too friggin bad. I'm not going to cry a river for them.
 
why do you spend so much time worrying about how to get more money out of the rich

speeding tickets are revenue enhancers. speeding is not inherently wrong-they are Malum prohibitum not malum per se in other words speeding is illegal because the law says it is not because it is inherently wrong (like murder, rape or armed robbery)

in fact speeding isn't even immoral. if you speed you should pay the same fine as everyone else

If speeding isn't immoral .. why do you think there are speed limits? I believe the argument goes something like this: since speeding hat a higher potential for more severe accidents, reducing ones speed should lower the risk and severity of an accident.

Also, I do not think we were questioning the morality of speeding .. I think we were talking about making sure to apply appropriate, effective and fair consequences to all citizens, instead of allowing the rich to suffer more from a fine and letting the wealthy throw a few, painless dollars (relatively speaking) for the same infraction.

Additionally, there are more infractions than simply speeding and such fair punishment practices should be applied to those as well.
 
Should not the rich and wealthy be setting a good example of behavior that the poor should be following ?
Things are strange in our nation...Do we really think is OK that one man pays a 1% speeding fine and another pays a 10% ?
Fair ??
 
Should not the rich and wealthy be setting a good example of behavior that the poor should be following ?
Things are strange in our nation...Do we really think is OK that one man pays a 1% speeding fine and another pays a 10% ?
Fair ??


If the fine is 35$ who endures more hardship, they guy with a 1000$ or the guy with 100$?
 
Thank you!

And I would apply this same line of questioning to my tax burden.

Why is our tax burdens (in the U.S.) proportionate to our income rather than our useage?

If Ross Perot or Bill Gates were in line at the grocery with you,.... and you and he were both buying a gallon of milk,... would he be expected to pay more for the milk than you are,... just because he has billions of dollars at his disposal?

the ones who pay more tax should have more votes.
 
I got a $320 fine for speeding in the US, at the time there was 2$ to the £, the cop was a good guy, I enjoyed the experience.

The Mustang I was driving was good fun but very crude in comparison to the Ferrari I had then:rofl

i prefer my ferrarri too a mustang to.
 
Should not the rich and wealthy be setting a good example of behavior that the poor should be following ?
Things are strange in our nation...Do we really think is OK that one man pays a 1% speeding fine and another pays a 10% ?
Fair ??

it is to some folks
 
the ones who pay more tax should have more votes.

Why? Would it not be more advantageous to have those with higher I.Q.'s or higher grades in high school or college given more votes (that is if we were forced to mess with the voting system)? What you are suggesting only allows the wealthy to be even more greedy via more power than they already have in voting. Its bad enough that politicians are already far too influenced by the wealthy as they rely on their campaign contributions?
 
The problem with fines is that for those with enough money to ignore them, they fail to act as a deterrent. However, speeding tickets also lead to license suspension, so I would say that income based fines aren't required.

Do you propose no fining for anyone then? Why is it that you think fines were imposed in the first place?
 
I understand some of the arguments, so here's what I think -

For things that are purchased, sold, etc. everything should be the same. For fines and penalties for breaking the law, it should be based on income. There is no punishment for buying milk, but there should be punishment for speeding.
 
I understand some of the arguments, so here's what I think -

For things that are purchased, sold, etc. everything should be the same. For fines and penalties for breaking the law, it should be based on income. There is no punishment for buying milk, but there should be punishment for speeding.


tell me how that is going to survive the 14th amendment
 
If the fines are based on a percentage of income for everyone, wouldn't that be equal treatment under the law?


It could be done on a graduated system as well just like taxes.
 
Last edited:
Fines absolutely SHOULD be according to income, for two reasons:

1) What amounts to minor aggravation for a wealthy person could make a poor person homeless. Traffic fines here are often roughly equal to a month's rent.

2) Poor people are targeted, ther's all kinds of racial profiling going on and the traffic court here is always full of poor people who were ticketed for things like not being able to afford insurance but having to drive to work. There's no public transportation here, either. Meanwhile I've seen more well-to-do people weaving, speeding, going through stop signs and red lights and never even getting pulled over. The playing field needs to be leveled.
 
Back
Top Bottom