|
on the left posted:Why should low-income people be selective immune to traffic laws? Why is that theoretical so abhorrent, when the current reality is that high-income people are immune to traffic laws?
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:44 |
|
on the left posted:Fines incentivize civilized behavior. Okay. Should they be penalizing, that is, genuinely inconveniencing people that are fined? That seems to be what you're suggesting. Shouldn't they be based on the ability to pay so that everyone receives an equitable penalty, then? If I make 50 grand, a hundred-dollar ticket is a slap on the wrist, as opposed to if I'm making 15,000 a year, where it's a more substantial chunk of my income. Shouldn't I have to pay more money if I make more money, so that I am equally incentivized?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
A lot of the time the speed limit for a road is too low for the road, so everyone "speeds", and it is unsafe to follow the speed limit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:What do you think happens if you don't pay a traffic fine? You lose your license. So now we have gone from just a speeding ticket to something "much more serious." There is a term for this: Rergressive. It's a huge issue with the justice system in Missouri and everywhere. I'm not payin my taxes anymore. That's loving it. Come get me cops. poo poo, that didn't work out well either. drat
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:I'm not payin my taxes anymore. That's loving it. Come get me cops. Federal taxes in America are actually progressive, they could be more progressive, but that doesn't really have a lot to do with Ferguson Missouri and the current retributive enforcement that is going on there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:57
|
|
|
Man, if only this thread and other discussions had some data about how black people are stopped by the cops disproportionally to offense rate. That sure would be something. But I guess it's just all about don't do the crime if you can't do the time, nothing else here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay. Should they be penalizing, that is, genuinely inconveniencing people that are fined? That seems to be what you're suggesting. Shouldn't they be based on the ability to pay so that everyone receives an equitable penalty, then? If I make 50 grand, a hundred-dollar ticket is a slap on the wrist, as opposed to if I'm making 15,000 a year, where it's a more substantial chunk of my income. Shouldn't I have to pay more money if I make more money, so that I am equally incentivized? It doesn't matter what the fines are if police are not able to collect the money. If jail time is out and people are judgement-proof, you would have a license to speed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:That's not really evidence. Are you seriously contending fines don't deter speeding and other prohibited behavior?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
A really simple way to improve things would be to waive court costs under a certain income level. A big part of the issue is that court costs effectively create a minimum ticket amount, so you get a $15 fine and it costs $250. $30 fines are still a great disincentive to lower class citizens to be jackasses, but it's a sad fact that a basic ticket can literally be outside of a poor person's ability to pay right now. That's excessive punishment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:01
|
|
on the left posted:It doesn't matter what the fines are if police are not able to collect the money. If jail time is out and people are judgement-proof, you would have a license to speed. So, in other words, "I don't want to think about it". You really shouldn't vote, with that kind of attitude.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:Man, if only this thread and other discussions had some data about how black people are stopped by the cops disproportionally to offense rate. That sure would be something. But I guess it's just all about don't do the crime if you can't do the time, nothing else here. What is "offense rate"? How do you measure that? Without being stopped of course.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:So, in other words, "I don't want to think about it". You really shouldn't vote, with that kind of attitude. No, he had a point there
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Are you seriously contending fines don't deter speeding and other prohibited behavior? I think it's on you to demonstrate that increasing fines and penalties has an increased effectiveness that is worth literally jailing people over a fine. Darth123123 posted:What is "offense rate"? How do you measure that? Without being stopped of course. You use percentages.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Are you seriously contending fines don't deter speeding and other prohibited behavior? I'm sure that there's some minor deterrent effect, but since most people can speed on thousands to tens of thousands of trips without being pulled over, it doesn't really factor into the risk equation for most people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:I think it's on you to demonstrate that increasing fines and penalties has an increased effectiveness that is worth literally jailing people over a fine. Do you support putting people who don't pay their taxes in jail?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:11
|
|
Darth123123 posted:No, he had a point there Okay. If a policy does not do what you want it to do, why would you defend it? It's bad policy. The bad outcomes people are complaining about are directly related to it being bad policy. Defending a policy that does not do what you want it to do, because it happens to be policy, is the essence of stupidity or insanity. So which one are you?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
on the left posted:Do you support putting people who don't pay their taxes in jail? I don't support arguing with someone who makes absurd blanket questions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I'm sure that there's some minor deterrent effect, but since most people can speed on thousands to tens of thousands of trips without being pulled over, it doesn't really factor into the risk equation for most people. So we need more cops
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:I don't support arguing with someone who makes absurd blanket questions. If it's wrong to put people in jail over an unpaid fine, it's surely unjust to put people in a cage because they didn't their taxes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
on the left posted:If it's wrong to put people in jail over an unpaid fine, it's surely unjust to put people in a cage because they didn't their taxes. You're really strawmanning here
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
You know, let's take these analogies to the limit. People like on the left and Darth123123, with their insistence on defending policy just because it happens to be policy, even if it goes against what they hold dear, would have cheerfully defended Auschwitz. Sure, they'd concede that murdering Jews is bad, but they'd still doggedly argue in favor of the death camps, because they don't want to think about the things that they don't think about, nor the things that they think about either.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
on the left posted:Do you support putting people who don't pay their taxes in jail? Actually I support an automatic Tax system, where you don't really have a choice to pay/not pay your taxes as an individual, but I guess that system is just impossible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:16
|
|
|
Cole posted:You're really strawmanning here It's not a strawman at all, unless you think that there's some monetary threshold where jailtime becomes appropriate to collect government debt. Effectronica posted:You know, let's take these analogies to the limit. People like on the left and Darth123123, with their insistence on defending policy just because it happens to be policy, even if it goes against what they hold dear, would have cheerfully defended Auschwitz. Sure, they'd concede that murdering Jews is bad, but they'd still doggedly argue in favor of the death camps, because they don't want to think about the things that they don't think about, nor the things that they think about either. Being in favor of speeding tickets means you are basically the kind of person who supports Auschwitz, got it. Powercrazy posted:Actually I support an automatic Tax system, where you don't really have a choice to pay/not pay your taxes as an individual, but I guess that system is just impossible. This would be great for people who work/do business internationally, it would be a great thing to effectively end taxes for people who do not utilize the US financial system.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
on the left posted:It's not a strawman at all, unless you think that there's some monetary threshold where jailtime becomes appropriate to collect government debt. When it starts disrupting government infrastructure. But that's almost impossible to determine. What is your idea of an alternative?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I'm sure that there's some minor deterrent effect, but since most people can speed on thousands to tens of thousands of trips without being pulled over, it doesn't really factor into the risk equation for most people. So the fact the speeding "everyone does" is consistently a small amount over the posted limit just not register to you or what? Why do you think that is? I mean holy poo poo this is dumb Jarmak fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Feb 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:23
|
|
on the left posted:It's not a strawman at all, unless you think that there's some monetary threshold where jailtime becomes appropriate to collect government debt. Sure, I am firmly, firmly in favor of equal rights for Jews, but come on. The law is the law. Do you want people running around murdering each other? That's why we should not, in my opinion, close the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Cole posted:When it starts disrupting government infrastructure. But that's almost impossible to determine. What is your idea of an alternative? The alternative is the system we have now, that puts people in jail if they don't pay the government. Also, in Ferguson, the government would fall without ticket revenue, so it does make sense to arrest people if degradation of government infrastructure is the standard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
on the left posted:It's not a strawman at all, unless you think that there's some monetary threshold where jailtime becomes appropriate to collect government debt. You could read the last few pages of the thread where this is discussed in detail with the problems and various possible solutions being outline. Or you could continue to argue as if you're a child and can only think in absolute terms of law and order. I see you've chosen the latter, but that doesn't mean anyone has to respond to your dumb posts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:25
|
|
Jarmak posted:So the fact the speeding "everyone does" is consistently a small amount over the posted limit just not register to you or what? Why do you think that is? Okay. So do you also believe that flat fees are a good idea for traffic tickets?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:You use percentages. I'm bad at math. What is offense rate defined as BTW.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
Cole posted:So we need more cops To be honest, if there was a way to track every single car simultaneously and assess a continuous fine as they drive, I'd be in favor of it. I think that if you got caught 100% of the time when you exceeded the speed limit, it'd increase compliance AND it'd lead to higher speed limits on some roads. (Or more realistically, it'd be so unpopular that it'd be banned everywhere except towns like Ferguson.) Jarmak posted:So the fact the speeding "everyone does" is consistently a small amount over the posted limit just not register to you or what? Why do you think that is? Where I live, it's a 65 mph speed limit on the freeways and it is not at all unusual for the flow of traffic to be 75-80.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:27
|
|
|
on the left posted:The alternative is the system we have now, that puts people in jail if they don't pay the government. The system in Florida doesn't put you in jail if you don't pay a speeding ticket. It suspends your license and then jails you if you continue to drive. But it's cool that a thread about a dude getting shot has become about speeding tickets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Cole posted:The system in Florida doesn't put you in jail if you don't pay a speeding ticket. It suspends your license and then jails you if you continue to drive. The disproportional stopping and fining of poor black people in Ferguson is a big part of the discussion of the riots.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Okay. If a policy does not do what you want it to do, why would you defend it? It's bad policy. The bad outcomes people are complaining about are directly related to it being bad policy. Defending a policy that does not do what you want it to do, because it happens to be policy, is the essence of stupidity or insanity. So which one are you? No one is defending "bad policy" but on the left posted:It doesn't matter what the fines are if police are not able to collect the money. If jail time is out and people are judgement-proof, you would have a license to speed. Doesn't mean he's defending anything but enforcing, in some manner, being able to enforce a sembelance of law (and order) 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
on the left posted:Do you support putting people who don't pay their taxes in jail? We attempt to charge people taxes that are fair for their income level, while no such effort is made to do so with fines. If a person gets a fine that is above their ability to pay, there should be mechanisms in place to assist that person so they are not locked into "go to jail" no matter what happens, which is literally the case for some people!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:32
|
|
Darth123123 posted:No one is defending "bad policy" but Actually, yes, he's defending bad policy. I realize that you have a shriveled corpse of a brain instead of a fully-functioning one, but perhaps some oxygen-deprived neuron will grasp this: responding to a point about how the policy itself is fundamentally flawed with "we have to enforce it" is, in fact, defending the bad policy.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Darth123123 posted:I'm bad at math. What is offense rate defined as BTW. If there is no evidence that black people commit more traffic violations than white people but they get more tickets than white people, that is a higher rate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:The disproportional stopping and fining of poor black people in Ferguson is a big part of the discussion of the riots. For the record, I disagree with the "Stop and kill" policy enforced, but parking in granny's space because gently caress it, i'm against.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Actually, yes, he's defending bad policy. I realize that you have a shriveled corpse of a brain instead of a fully-functioning one, but perhaps some oxygen-deprived neuron will grasp this: responding to a point about how the policy itself is fundamentally flawed with "we have to enforce it" is, in fact, defending the bad policy. Nah, his point is that, at some deep level, all law has to be enforced by the threat of physical violence or being locked up, because otherwise it's de facto legal to ignore the law - that's a true statement. That doesn't mean that the government can't take steps to lower the burden of fines on the poor and working with people who miss court for good reasons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
theflyingorc posted:We attempt to charge people taxes that are fair for their income level, while no such effort is made to do so with fines. If a person gets a fine that is above their ability to pay, there should be mechanisms in place to assist that person so they are not locked into "go to jail" no matter what happens, which is literally the case for some people! There is. It's called "call your courthouse and work a payment plan out." You don't have to pay it all at once, believe it or not. You just can't be lazy about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2015 03:36
|
|