Hi everyone, I'm amused by the current news story about the "unlucky" Swedish driver who has been threatened with the possibility of a $1 million speeding fine after being caught driving his Mercedes SLS at almost 200 mph in Switzerland, where speeding fines are based on a combination of the driver's income and the recorded speed at which he was driving. Sadly, my own punishment would be substantially less, given the top speed of my family car and my modest income! I just wonder if Forum members believe that income-based speeding fines are a good idea?
as I don't drive lol I actually don't care. But yes I think it should be I hung out with some wealthy people at uni and with the combination of international driving licences and the size of the fine being caught speeding wasn't much of a threat.# Having said that my brother got caught doing 128 mph in a H reg Proton
When some earners are getting taxed 50% of their income. No. If we ever got a one tax for all (haha), then i'd agree to having RTA fines based on incomes. And other things. When it comes to the Mercedes SLS, you should get fined if it isn't going fast enough
200 mph? Or was it kph? I only ask because Switzerland doesn't use miles, and it would make a very significant difference in how fast he was actually driving! If indeed it was 200mph, that would mean it was over 320kph (how did he manage to find a road to pull that off on?)! But if it was 200kph, it would be about 124mph. If the case of the former, then I would rather his license be taken permanently as that's ludicrous speed.... The later doesn't strike me as so significant of a crime to warrant such a hefty fine to me.
They base the amount of your ticket on your income? Maybe it's just because I'm not used to it, but that doesn't sound like a stellar idea. I think tickets should be based on how fast you were going. For example, for every mile over the speed limit, you pay x amount of money. That seems more fair.
They have laws over here (And I'm not sure of the absolutes) but if you lead the police on a high speed persuade, you can get a prision sentence based on how far you lead them (1km = one month) such as, 12 kms - up to 1 year locked up. Sadly, i don't think the laws are/will be kept up to scratch. (Such as if you have a record, compared to someone who's never really been booked for anything). I personally love the idea though and hope they push it.
It quite common in many European countries to have fines being based on income. In Sweden we got of system of day-fine for a number of offences. 60 day fine would then be what that person earns in 60 days (with a minimal day fine even if you don't have an income.) Serious offences like rape where the offender should compensate the victim as well as go to jail have a case to case definitive fine, rather then a day fine. And I think is fair in the instances is used. The punishment should feel just as much no matter how much you earn.
Annuniel It was almost 200 MPH, or around 300 KPH. Heather - it's not based purely on income. It's a combination of income AND the speed at which you're recorded. As for its fairness, let's not fool ourselves here. Some multi-millionaire out speeding in his Lamborghini is not likely to be deterred by the prospect of a fine of a couple of hundred dollars, is he? It has to be a substantial enough sum to matter to the individual.
I believe in uniformity under the law. Wealth is not a crime, nor should it be. Nor should poverty be carte blanche to commit crimes freely. I can see it now - police neing quietly urged to focus their attention on the obviously wealthy, to swell the coffers of small town government. If you wish to insure equal impact, impose serving hours of community service, and safety education, and periods of license suspension. See the pattern of excessive litigation in the United States if you don't believe a "deep pockets" enforcement philosophy is harmful.
This is exactly how I feel. It doesn't matter whether a person makes $10 an hour or $100...if you're going 80 MPH in a 45 mile zone, you committed the same crime and should pay the same fine. If you don't want to have to pay a fine you can't afford, you shouldn't speed.
But then the person who earns more escapes with what is, relatively speaking, a lesser punishment. We have the standard scale, with bands A, B and C. Band A is a fine of up to 50% of a person's weekly wage, B is 100% of a person's weekly wage, C is 150%. A person who earns £100 might be fined £50 for driving at 40 in a 30 zone, but then a person who earns £1,000 a week might be fined £500. Relative to the person, I believe that's fair. And most fair of all - both get the same number of points on their licence. Once they have 12 points, it's a year ban from driving.
The $1 million toilet... Hi guys Last week, I brought you the thread about the $1 million speeding ticket, so here is the next instalment in the series... I see, with no little amusement, that the toilet which once belonged to the late literary genius JD Salinger, is currently on sale on eBay for the same price. It has been speculated that many of JD's stories were dreamed up, or at least ruminated upon, while he sat on it. Not, unfortunately, the classic "The Catcher In The Rye", which was written before he moved to the house that the toilet has come from, but it is believed that as many as 15 complete novel manuscripts may exist from his later years. My personal financial situation precludes the possibility of my bidding on the item, which is a shame, since my writing is suffering from a period of constipation at the moment. No s**t.
LOL its like Madonna removes toilet seats from venues to prevent them being sold on ebay - guess I can't imagine even wanting Peter Sissons or Michael Ball's toilet. Funny was just having a toilet discussion with my bestfriend do they still have those capsule self flushing affairs that play music where you are?
