Safe Speed Forums

It makes no odds whether they are conservatives. In Conway's case, they've hit him where it hurts (in the pocket) by finishing his career. For the lowly types of person attracted to power, financial penalties hurt even more than the lash!

That's how it works at the moment!

That's a laugh, how long before he ends up in a nice cosy earning job somewhere else?

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Yes, the businessmen in Gateshead must be eager to hire an MP accused of embezzlement by his colleagues. So no wonder the economy sucks up there!

PS: and in case anyone thinks I'm being harsh, the committee report said it was:

Ganz richtig!

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

If only, Boomer..............

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

He might park on double yellows just so he does not have to park in a public car park and come back to his car with a nice dint from the door of a 1993 rover with some chav at the wheel

Good point, although I would disagree with chavs and Rovers - they go for Vauxhalls mainly or, if they can amass enough child-allowance, BMW's.

Sits back and waits for some po-faced twonk to tear that comment apart without seeing my tongue firmly placed in my cheek...

Perhaps we can have an emoticon saying 'Jocule' or some diagrams showing the process of smiling...

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...

I think they have those in Germany. The tradition here is to use jokes that actually make people laugh!

No. This is the basic flaw in your argument. The punishment should fit the crime not the perpetrator.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

It’s no use at all fining some people 40 quid. Lots of people made 100 times that (and more) on Friday afternoon alone (although it was a good day for once). So why should I stop doing a bad thing if the “punishment” is so painless in practical terms? The punishment must fit the perpetrator and the crime if you want it to work as a deterrent. You are right only if you don’t care whether a punishment works on the perp.

You are entitled to repeat your words, but it would be nice if you would back them.

Do you think that unemployed people with no income and assets should be able to offend free of the burden of punishment?

By the way, you now seem to have changed your position from

to

Just one more step and you will agree with me.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

A heavy fine for such people serves no purpose as they have no money to pay it. They would add it to their costs of support, and the taxpayer (i.e. you and me) would pay it back to ourselves, with the addition of court costs!


It's easy to become confused about the difference between "related to" and "proportional to".

The size of a fine should be related to the impact it has, else (a) people don't pay them (at one end of the scale) or (b) they have no impact (at the other). The only people who give a hoot about a £60 fine are the working poor. They might as well pack it in and go on the dole - they are better off.

Between the pair of you you are pointing out the obvious flaw in monetary punishment.
If its a fixed fine the well off can cough up out of the petty cash in their wallet whilst those at the opposite end of the scale ignore it as they can't pay it anyway. By the very nature of the punishment there can only be a narrow income band where the fine has the right deterrent effect.
If its a variable sum then it attracts the criticism of unfairness and bias against doing well for oneself.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

And you can bet your bottom boots that the meter maids etc would only target expensive cars.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Yes, an added bonus, especially for me!

Too true, RigPig. Points are a cunning idea, aren't they? We all get it in the neck with those... I wonder if we should have "micro points". That way, a small excursion over the limit (or some other petty thing) just eats up a little of your license at a time.

Quite an interesting idea. No fines at all but say 100 points for totting up to a ban. There is much more scope for the graduation of offences then.

If parking enforcement were included then the Veyron driver really would be punished the same as anyone else.

Still, it's a dream. If you couldn't collect money for parking offences then there would be no parking wardens.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

Not quite!

The scumbag will get a small fine that they never pay (and never get chased for), or a community service sentence that they don't turn up for because they "forget" or a tag that they cut off and don't get punished for!

People with a self-generated income have to self-confess, stump up, or try to get a fair trial where they end up stumping up even more

mb

why is that?

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair