Should Traffic Fines simply be Abolished?

[Crazy Dazz]

Seems to me they serve no useful purpose, other than revenue.

Now I don't mind the idea of the government getting revenue from violations, after-all they have to raise money somewhere, but it occurs to me that the effectiveness of monetary penalties depends completely on your wealth, and that simply isn't fair.

For rich ****s and CUBs, a $200 fine (with no demerits) is inconsequential.
But for some families that's the week's groceries.

I also think that it skews Police behaviour. Because its revenue focussed, they don't care who cops to the fine, as long as its paid. That means even with demerits, there's too much scope to easily avoid the repercussions.
It also seems that the methodology is now increasingly geared towards automated revenue collection. Speed cameras and computers issue and collect fines, without any need for human involvement, and therefore nobody bothers to check that the correct person is being pinged.

I also suspect, that a system based not on money but on actually penalising repeat offenders, would be more likely to be targetted on black-spots, rather the straight-stretch speed-cameras we see now.

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

[EgoFG]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

Corporal punishment

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

That's a problem now.
And get this, in WA at least, if caught with a licence suspended due to non-payment of fines, the only penalty is
wait for it,
yup, another $250 fine (with no demerit points.)

Under my proposal, firstly the number of suspensions would be far less, making it far more practical for police to follow up and actually enforce suspensions.
Then, people losing their licences would only be repeat offenders, so imposing a harsher penalty for driving whilst suspended would be warranted. Something like:
1st time - More Points
2nd time - Community Service
3rd time - Weekend Home Detention
etc

[whitelion65]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

What happens indeed!
I hear of a LOT of cases of people with multiple suspensions....no licence for twenty years etc etc....
What to do with these “folk”?

[arronm]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

So what happens to all those people caught who don't have a license or caught while their license is suspended or cancelled?

First time its 6 additional points. Second time you go to jail.

[71cop]

Originally Posted by arronm

First time its 6 additional points. Second time you go to jail.

How nice, more people in already overcrowded jails ( more that we all have to pay for that is ). All is good we'll just build more jails, taxpayer loses again.

[EgoFG]

Very good plan. Speed could be de-emphasized, and points focussed on actual causes of collisions. Perhaps a repeat offense of the same kind gets an extra point.


Maybe a large fee for renewal after points based suspension

lets say the greatest of

1) 2% of your gross income,

2) 0.2% of the value of your primary residence

3) $2000 (annually indexed to CPI)

[b0son]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

Maybe a large fee for renewal after points based suspension

But the points relative to the offence is largely arbitrary, not grounded in any actual stats.

[Citroënbender]

You've only got to watch ten minutes of DCOA videos to realise that there is an appreciable slice of the driving population who simply do not care.

It doesn't matter how big the fines, how dire the rules, they are going to do what they're going to do until either Newton addresses the situation or they get a lengthy stretch. This is not a call for "more jails/jail sentences" but simply an observation.

[mike_nofx]

The current system makes sense.

If you can’t afford to lose $200 because you won’t be able to buy weekly groceries, well that should be enough incentive to obey traffic laws then right?

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

The current system makes sense.

If you can’t afford to lose $200 because you won’t be able to buy weekly groceries, well that should be enough incentive to obey traffic laws then right?

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

Sure. And let rich folk pay all the revenue.

If you remove all cash fines, the government will still need their revenue and will just bump up everyone’s tax and the poor man still ends up paying.

But as the saying goes, if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Poor man can’t afford to speed, rich man can.

Though what fine are you referring to as $200 and no points anyway?

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Sure. And let rich folk pay all the revenue.

If you remove all cash fines, the government will still need their revenue and will just bump up everyone’s tax and the poor man still ends up paying.

But as the saying goes, if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Poor man can’t afford to speed, rich man can.

Though what fine are you referring to as $200 and no points anyway?

But we are told minor traffic offenses are deadly. That means the government should be encouraging all people to obey the rules, not just poor people.

[simon varley]

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run

the majority of objective peer reviewed research indicates that the judicious application of speed cameras does indeed result in fewer road fatalities.

and there you have it in a nutshell. exactly why nobody believes that in Australia speed cameras have anything to do with safety.

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by Ben73

But we are told minor traffic offenses are deadly. That means the government should be encouraging all people to obey the rules, not just poor people.

They do. Points loss still affects rich people. Just the fine has less impact.

Can’t increase a fine for someone who earns more money. What next, charging them more for fuel and rego?

Funnily enough though, when I see highway patrol with a car pulled over, it’s rarely your high end luxury and sports cars (ie. rich folk cars) it’s generally the low end poor mans cars.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Right, so you're saying only poor people should have to obey the law?

your opening post and this one come across like obeying the rules means you are missing out on something. Rich people get to break the rules because the penalty isn't a deterrent equals its not fair to those poorer people?

The problem with society is that everyone worries about someone elses problem. How about just drive your car and obey the rules and don't contribute to the system. Its not difficult.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Seems to me they serve no useful purpose, other than revenue.

Now I don't mind the idea of the government getting revenue from violations, after-all they have to raise money somewhere, but it occurs to me that the effectiveness of monetary penalties depends completely on your wealth, and that simply isn't fair.

For rich ****s and CUBs, a $200 fine (with no demerits) is inconsequential.
But for some families that's the week's groceries.

I also think that it skews Police behaviour. Because its revenue focussed, they don't care who cops to the fine, as long as its paid. That means even with demerits, there's too much scope to easily avoid the repercussions.
It also seems that the methodology is now increasingly geared towards automated revenue collection. Speed cameras and computers issue and collect fines, without any need for human involvement, and therefore nobody bothers to check that the correct person is being pinged.

I also suspect, that a system based not on money but on actually penalising repeat offenders, would be more likely to be targetted on black-spots, rather the straight-stretch speed-cameras we see now.

My proposal is simple: Replace all fines with demerit points, with the number of points and their duration increasing for more severe offences. When your points exceed the limit, your license is suspended until enough points expire to put you X% under the limit.

I have a fool-proof way of never giving these thieving bastards anything, nothing, zip, ****-all

I don't do anything wrong - it works all the time for me.

My last traffic infringement was in Wodonga in late December 1997, that's right, 22 years ago, and I do lots of miles

[Franco Cozzo]

Me too Trev - I just haven't been caught

Gotta be like a fly on ****, have a hundred eyes everywhere

If you really wanted to make a stand you just need to run a campaign getting everyone who has been fined to contest them - one of my mates just joined VicPol and he goes if someone contests one of his fines it generates so much paperwork that they'll just drop it unless the person they fined was a smart ***.

[roKWiz]

Yes, all fines should be abolished for Franco. He does us all a major service.
For everyone else, I'm with Trev.
My last fine was 1984 from memory.

[ute83]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I have a fool-proof way of never giving these thieving bastards anything, nothing, zip, ****-all

I don't do anything wrong - it works all the time for me.

My last traffic infringement was in Wodonga in late December 1997, that's right, 22 years ago, and I do lots of miles

Don't even creep 2 or 3 k's over the limit, even accidentally. I call BS....

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by ute83

Don't even creep 2 or 3 k's over the limit, even accidentally. I call BS....

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

Yep, Usually most have cruise control set on freeways at speed limit so it would read under.

side note....often wonder whether cruise control attributes to a lot of country accidents due to the slower reaction time moving your foot back to the brake pedal as it wouldn't normally rest on the ac pedal. ??

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Yep, Usually most have cruise control set on freeways at speed limit so it would read under.

side note....often wonder whether cruise control attributes to a lot of country accidents due to the slower reaction time moving your foot back to the brake pedal as it wouldn't normally rest on the ac pedal. ??

Funny you should mention that. I have seen the extreme of that gem on the Bruce approaching Morayfield BP servo. A clown (sorry to circus performers) war merrily cruising along, resting back, with his right foot resting on the side mirror. Maybe he has a smelly foot, but if something happened, the rest of him would have been smelly. I looked at him while passing and shook my head. Response? Big birdie.

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I love when people bring this up, I love it

"Ohhhh, I was booked for 3 k's over, oh whoa is me" - bull-**** I say!!!

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Never whinge about the 3k's over

it is widely accepted by Police (in Victoria) when using their radar they allow 10%, however the fixed mobile camera's are set for 3k's

So, where do you find fixed mobile camera's? Easy, where it is obvious ****ers speed - pretty simple. Obvious straights on freeways, known 'hotspots', in towns where people should know better, high traffic area's where there is a clear straight run, if you don't know that then hand in your licence

Absolutely agree Trev. I could not have put it better.

[98TLS]

If your stupid enough to speed and the result of being caught is you dont eat for a week then you deserve to go hungry imho. Not saying by any stretch i dont ever drive/ride over the posted limit but theres a time n place for eveything if i get pinged its a fair call so just suck it up.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

All but a few cars have a 5-10% variation built into the speedo's, so they are reading slow, if you are doing 100 by the speedo you are most likely doing 95 - fact

So, to get booked for 3 k's over you must be doing close to 110 by the speedo, 108+ exactly by the speedo - fact, people know they are going that fast

Nope, that's just crap

I'm actually a careful driver, haven't had an accident for decades. I'm not in a hurry to get anywhere and try to stick to the speed limit.
yes I get careless, and I've copped a couple of fines at 6k over the limit. And I accept that I must have been doing that speed.
But according to your theory, I must have been doing an indicated speed at least 10k over, and that I definitely wasn't.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Nope, that's just crap

I'm actually a careful driver, haven't had an accident for decades. I'm not in a hurry to get anywhere and try to stick to the speed limit.
yes I get careless, and I've copped a couple of fines at 6k over the limit. And I accept that I must have been doing that speed.
But according to your theory, I must have been doing an indicated speed at least 10k over, and that I definitely wasn't.

read my post again, with no emotion, then prove I am wrong.

I have driven only 2 cars whose speedo's were reasonably accurate, one was an FG Falcon, the other is my Ranger after I put slightly bigger wheels on it, it made the speed actually read 1 k faster, so at speedo of 99 I was actually doing 100

[Tassie f100]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Nope, that's just crap

I'm actually a careful driver, haven't had an accident for decades. I'm not in a hurry to get anywhere and try to stick to the speed limit.
yes I get careless, and I've copped a couple of fines at 6k over the limit. And I accept that I must have been doing that speed.
But according to your theory, I must have been doing an indicated speed at least 10k over, and that I definitely wasn't.

I am 100% with Trevor on that one.Most likely you had a lapse in concentration,maybe slight downhill run and the speed crept up on you

[ute83]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

I have a fool-proof way of never giving these thieving bastards anything, nothing, zip, ****-all

I don't do anything wrong - it works all the time for me.

My last traffic infringement was in Wodonga in late December 1997, that's right, 22 years ago, and I do lots of miles

It's not just a couple of ks over the limit. You claim to not do anything wrong. Like all of us you would break some laws every time you drive. I take what you say as white noise Trev, ever since your global warming preaching and then going racing on week ends.

On the topic of fines. I don't think people care any more.