Topic: $235,000 speeding ticket

[ArticSteve]

If these guys maybe respected other peoples lives, then it wouldn't be a concern.  But does respecting private property take precedence over respecting lives?
What would the end cost have been if one of these cars had hit a pedestrian?  Oh, I guess that's not as important as protecting their private property.

In the last 2 weeks 20 pedestrians have been run down by vehicles in Toronto.



There are only 2 types of ppl in a society.

1.  PPL who desire to live under an Authoritarian state.

2.  PPL who desire to live in a Libertarian state.


From my observations the Libertarians are in the minority and fading..

[Sir Osis of Liver]

My gripe is...why is the fine $225,000 for one guy, but maybe only $2000 for another guy?

Giving a $225k fine to Bill Gates isn't going to hurt nearly as much as giving me a $2k fine.

But you're saying the crime is more severe if you drive a Ferrari than a Mustang.

Or you could break that law easily with almost any $1000 motorcycle...

The point of having fines at all, is that they are a disincentive for anti-social behaviours. Giving someone with a 6 or 7 figure income a $1000 fine isn't much of a disincentive. It certainly is for the guy making $35k.

[rrocket]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

[Sir Osis of Liver]

From my observations the Libertarians are in the minority and fading..

With good reason. The libertarian showcase is Somalia. No government intervention at all, no taxes, no gun laws, just roaming militias and warlords running the show. Libertarian dream!

People get the governments they deserve, and are relatively good at kicking out governments and policies they don't like.

[mmret]

The point of having fines at all, is that they are a disincentive for anti-social behaviours. Giving someone with a 6 or 7 figure income a $1000 fine isn't much of a disincentive. It certainly is for the guy making $35k.

Agreed here. Although the courts have been known to bugger it up completely in some alimony judgements.

It also raises the point of what is actually done with the funds from these fines. Two thoughts come to mind:
-Use them to fund the justice system. Kind of makes sense although you run the risk of creating a self-perpetuating monster.
-Toss them into a huge pot where at the end of every year everyone's income taxes get reduced proportionately. So the money goes back to the population. Probably will be a relatively small amount of money for everyone but you avoid having the state fining people left and right (think photo-radar) to fund the general accounts. If you get fined, you lose and your neighbours all win a little bit.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

[rrocket]

From my observations the Libertarians are in the minority and fading..

With good reason. The libertarian showcase is Somalia. No government intervention at all, no taxes, no gun laws, just roaming militias and warlords running the show. Libertarian dream!

People get the governments they deserve, and are relatively good at kicking out governments and policies they don't like.

I don't advocate that at all.  I don't think many Libertarians would either.

[mmret]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

So is the confiscation about justice or profit?

[rrocket]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

That's my point...it's a $225,000 fine ONLY if it suits them.....

[rrocket]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

So is the confiscation about justice or profit?

P R O F I T

[mmret]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

So is the confiscation about justice or profit?

P R O F I T

I was hoping for a ZING

[Sir Osis of Liver]

But I seriously have my doubts they'd be taking the $1000 motorcycle and auctioning it off....

This is a slippery slope IMO...

If it isn't cost effective for them to do it, why would they?

That's my point...it's a $225,000 fine ONLY if it suits them.....

Well not really. It does cost money to store and auction vehicles off. IF that cost is above the likely return, why would they bother? There are still going to be fines levied. If all the perpetrator can muster is $1000 for a bike it's likely the fines are going to be disincentive enough.

[mmret]

Well not really. It does cost money to store and auction vehicles off. IF that cost is above the likely return, why would they bother? There are still going to be fines levied. If all the perpetrator can muster is $1000 for a bike it's likely the fines are going to be disincentive enough.

And isn't jail time, license suspension, and the likely nuking of his presumably successful career deterrent enough for Mr. Ferrari? Or do we really just have to sell off his car too?

[Sir Osis of Liver]

From my observations the Libertarians are in the minority and fading..

With good reason. The libertarian showcase is Somalia. No government intervention at all, no taxes, no gun laws, just roaming militias and warlords running the show. Libertarian dream!

People get the governments they deserve, and are relatively good at kicking out governments and policies they don't like.

I don't advocate that at all.  I don't think many Libertarians would either.

You should spend some time in the South. The "Libertarians" there are actually anarchists.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Well not really. It does cost money to store and auction vehicles off. IF that cost is above the likely return, why would they bother? There are still going to be fines levied. If all the perpetrator can muster is $1000 for a bike it's likely the fines are going to be disincentive enough.

And isn't jail time, license suspension, and the likely nuking of his presumably successful career deterrent enough for Mr. Ferrari? Or do we really just have to sell off his car too?

Apparently, in the eyes of the court, that would be yes. Judges always have a certain amount of latitude in sentencing. In this case, the court decided a severe penalty is warranted. The convicted may have grounds to appeal if they can show the fine is disproportionate to the offence.

[rrocket]

From my observations the Libertarians are in the minority and fading..

With good reason. The libertarian showcase is Somalia. No government intervention at all, no taxes, no gun laws, just roaming militias and warlords running the show. Libertarian dream!

People get the governments they deserve, and are relatively good at kicking out governments and policies they don't like.

I don't advocate that at all.  I don't think many Libertarians would either.

You should spend some time in the South. The "Libertarians" there are actually anarchists.

Those those are the extreme lefties.  Just as destructive as the extreme right wing wackos...

[mmret]

Well not really. It does cost money to store and auction vehicles off. IF that cost is above the likely return, why would they bother? There are still going to be fines levied. If all the perpetrator can muster is $1000 for a bike it's likely the fines are going to be disincentive enough.

And isn't jail time, license suspension, and the likely nuking of his presumably successful career deterrent enough for Mr. Ferrari? Or do we really just have to sell off his car too?

Apparently, in the eyes of the court, that would be yes. Judges always have a certain amount of latitude in sentencing. In this case, the court decided a severe penalty is warranted. The convicted may have grounds to appeal if they can show the fine is disproportionate to the offence.

That much is obvious, but our discussion is about whether or not confiscation is a good idea in the first place. I am not asking you to regurgitate the implicit decision of the court.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Those those are the extreme lefties.  Just as destructive as the extreme right wing wackos...

But what the "Libertarians" in the US are advocating is essentially no government, and all services provided by the private sector. That's definitely not a left wing ideal. It certainly is anarchism.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

That much is obvious, but our discussion is about whether or not confiscation is a good idea in the first place. I am not asking you to regurgitate the implicit decision of the court.

Pardon me!

I'm not convinced confiscation is a good idea. I would prefer fines based on a percentage of gross income. Confiscation does go some way towards addressing the regressive nature of fixed fines.

[rrocket]

Those those are the extreme lefties.  Just as destructive as the extreme right wing wackos...

But what the "Libertarians" in the US are advocating is essentially no government, and all services provided by the private sector. That's definitely not a left wing ideal. It certainly is anarchism.

I think at this point in the US, the government is proving the can't do much of anything right.

But I do think gov't is needed.  But often I am finding they are overstepping their bounds...