Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

governing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 166 posts

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#141

Post by Balgair »

testplzignore wrote: post #73

Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Rome,_Ohio if you'd like to see how extreme this kind of corruption can get. It could be described as a military occupation of part of the United States by a rogue nation.

Along those lines:

Lyons CO, a town along the highway from Denver to Rocky Mountain National Park has a section where the speed limit drops from 55 to 25 within about 1/4th mile. Cops sit there all day long just fining tourists.

Kingman AZ is essentially a speed trap with more steps.

Just about any village on I-50 in Nevada does the speed step down too, typically from 75 to 35, as the highway goes through the village. The cops are typically not very well hidden either. As is similar to the Rome OH situation, if you are within sight, you are getting a fine. Top Gear ran into this issue in Season 12, episode 2 [0] and Clarkson was quite irrate on screen. Fortunately, I-80 is a much better and faster way across Nevada.

[0] https://www.topgear.com/show/series-12/episode-2

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#142

Post by appleiigs »

pessimizer wrote: post #139
appleiigs wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was independent to your income, then your income should not matter. The fine should be proportional to the infraction/crime/damage.

If I were moderately wealthy, there would be no incentive not to just think of the fine as a fee to break any ordinance wherever and whenever I wanted. Fines aren't costs, they are a deterrent.

Part deterrent, part punishment. Consider if I punched you in the face, you laughed it off and I get charged with assault; versus: I punch you, you're now disabled for life, and I get charged with assault. Should it be based on my income?

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#143

Post by distances »

appleiigs wrote: post #142
pessimizer wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were moderately wealthy, there would be no incentive not to just think of the fine as a fee to break any ordinance wherever and whenever I wanted. Fines aren't costs, they are a deterrent.

Part deterrent, part punishment. Consider if I punched you in the face, you laughed it off and I get charged with assault; versus: I punch you, you're now disabled for life, and I get charged with assault. Should it be based on my income?

That would not be based on day fines; fines and compensation are two different topics. "Disabled for life" sounds like prison time plus monetary compensation for the victim.

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#144

Post by appleiigs »

distances wrote: post #143
appleiigs wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part deterrent, part punishment. Consider if I punched you in the face, you laughed it off and I get charged with assault; versus: I punch you, you're now disabled for life, and I get charged with assault. Should it be based on my income?

That would not be based on day fines; fines and compensation are two different topics. "Disabled for life" sounds like prison time plus monetary compensation for the victim.

Right, which is my point. I think it should be proportional to the infraction/crime/damages. (Anyway, I am just having a conversation, will have to understand it better.)

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#145

Post by lazerpants »

drivers99 wrote: post #89
SteveNuts wrote: post #2

There are a few small towns in Minnesota where you will see an officer posted up right where the highway turns from 65mph to 45mph through town. They will be there almost all day, without fail. I don't think it's a coincidence that their cruisers are all brand new. It's obviously a source of income more than anything.

There aren't any Minnesota towns on the map in the article so it must not be more than 10%, presumably. It is interesting to see some towns that are famous in my local area for it: Morrison, CO (45.3%). 150,000 drivers pass through it daily, with a population of 431. It's hard to argue with as they stop people if they're going 15 MPH over the limit. [1] I think people here just get used to the lack of enforcement of…

I'm not sure if 285 technically runs through Morrison, but there are lots of tickets issued right there because it is essentially a highway but has a low speed limit. They could raise the speed limit by 10-20mph and it would probably still be safe. There are also several elevation changes that make it easier for a traffic officer to hide.

Weird that Mountain View is in the mix. Maybe it's just a statistical anomaly because the "town" is tiny and is actually in a metro area and may include a portion I-70.

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#146

Post by whamlastxmas »

distances wrote: post #136
CapricornNoble wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet another reason for the wealthy to obfuscate their earnings.

Earnings are visible in tax decisions. Dodging taxes is a crime in itself, and unrelated to day fines.

Does the fine also consider your average daily capital gains? If I make $200mm a year in investment returns and take a $0 salary do I get a paltry fine?

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#148

Post by cprayingmantis »

The town in East Tennessee is Bluff City and it’s notorious for its speed traps, cameras, and lazy law enforcement. It was so bad someone who got a ticket bought their domain when it expired https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/man-buys-police-dept-websi...

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#149

Post by distances »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #146
distances wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Earnings are visible in tax decisions. Dodging taxes is a crime in itself, and unrelated to day fines.

Does the fine also consider your average daily capital gains? If I make $200mm a year in investment returns and take a $0 salary do I get a paltry fine?

Capital gains are included. If you realized $200 million before getting some day fines you'll have a new record and your face in yellow press front covers.

Re: Small towns in much of the country are dependent on punitive fines and fees

#150

Post by distances »

appleiigs wrote: post #144
distances wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would not be based on day fines; fines and compensation are two different topics. "Disabled for life" sounds like prison time plus monetary compensation for the victim.

Right, which is my point. I think it should be proportional to the infraction/crime/damages. (Anyway, I am just having a conversation, will have to understand it better.)

It is still proportional to the crime, right? Just like with prison sentence: withholding of freedom is the deterrent part, and it hurts both rich and poor the same pretty much everywhere in the world (ignoring corruption). Day fines follow the same deterrent principle for smaller infractions: proportional to the crime and treats citizens in a roughly equal manner.

Compensating someone for damages, be it for the victim's health or possessions, is then supposed to follow the real inflicted costs and does not include a deterring component, thus monetarily equal regardless of the perpetrator's income. I'd suppose this is the same almost everywhere?

Edit: so to clarify, compensation paid to the victim isn't based on your income, only the fines part that is paid to the state as a deterrent is.

Post reply on HN