Traffic Fines based on Income

[Babba_not_Gump]

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/413792 ... nforcement
New West backs a new approach to BC traffic enforcement.

I like this idea.
A guy driving a beater, earning minimum wage, fined for speeding gets a $167 fine. Or whatever it is. This fine hurts.

A guy driving a half million dollar supercar, earning high six figures annually gets the same fine. This fine, meh, pocket change.

Should the province consider this?

[GordonH]

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/413792 ... nforcement
New West backs a new approach to BC traffic enforcement.

I like this idea.
A guy driving a beater, earning minimum wage, fined for speeding gets a $167 fine. Or whatever it is. This fine hurts.

A guy driving a half million dollar supercar, earning high six figures annually gets the same fine. This fine, meh, pocket change.

Should the province consider this?

impo it would level the playing field, by causing those with very deep pockets to think twice before breaking traffic laws. Because if caught it will hurt their pocket book.

So yes the province should bring this in.

[69cutlass]

We already have something akin to this with the icbc points system. Get more than 4 or 5 points in a year and you have to pay those points. Get too many points goodbye license.

[GordonH]

We already have something akin to this with the icbc points system. Get more than 4 or 5 points in a year and you have to pay those points. Get too many points goodbye license.

I say add it as just another deterrent to traffic violations.

[69cutlass]

We already have something akin to this with the icbc points system. Get more than 4 or 5 points in a year and you have to pay those points. Get too many points goodbye license.

I say add it as just another deterrent to traffic violations.

Then we need a major crackdown on left lane campers, of those unable to go with the flow or even the posted speed limit and all those too oblivious to everything around them.

[seewood]

Then we need a major crackdown on left lane campers, of those unable to go with the flow or even the posted speed limit and all those too oblivious to everything around them.

Gawd, its really bad on Vancouver Island.

The income based fine is being used in Europe : https://www.euronews.com/2023/01/04/fin ... e%20income.

In England:

The amount you’re fined depends on what the speed limit was and how much over it you were driving. It’s usually a percentage of your weekly income, up to a maximum of £1,000 (£2,500 if you were driving on a motorway).

[BC Landlord]

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

[dirtybiker]

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

Not really disagreeing, just pointing out a flaw. If in line for a fine, one has not been
abiding by the law.

[alanjh595]

For every 1 time someone is caught, they probably have done the same thing 200 times before.

Double or triple the fines and give a discount to those that have gone 20 years ticket/accident free.

[Gone_Fishin]

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

How far do we take this? If a low income person commits murder, do they get a suspended sentence while a higher income person gets the electric chair?

Do the crime pay the time (fine). The danger to other drivers from traffic violations is in no way proportional to income of the offender.

[BC Landlord]

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

Not really disagreeing, just pointing out a flaw. If in line for a fine, one has not been
abiding by the law.

You realize, there is a fundamental difference in between crime and traffic violations? You just can't compare a speeding ticket with dealing drugs.

[my5cents]

We already have something akin to this with the icbc points system. Get more than 4 or 5 points in a year and you have to pay those points. Get too many points goodbye license.

No, that's a different concept. That's the "frequent flyer program". The more violations the more it costs.

This is the more you earn the more it costs.

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

I think you missed the point a bit. A "successful" person would pay more, but they are paying for a ticket, doesn't that indicate they were not "law-abiding".

I have a different take on this. Why do people immediately go for a reduction of the fine for low income. I think the fines are... (wait for it) just fine.

I really don't support this type of system. If I'm well off, I already pay more for property tax (ownership fine), I already (at lease I should) pay more income tax.

Our justice system is intended to level the playing field between the wealthy and not so wealthy, with a lenient pre-trial release system, that unfortunately isn't calibrated to identify (or doesn't care about) the real bad guys.

We tried a system of points only. Everyone got a yearly freebie (2 or 3 points a year were free). Over those 2 or 3 points it began to cost. With ICBC current surcharge for points, we've got the "best" of both worlds, fines and surcharges.

Fines apparently work better than warnings. Hey, and what government doesn't like getting money ?

The only place the wealthy get a break is sales tax. No, not always, when they buy the luxury car or boat they pay through the nose, but if they are large earners, they don't spend a fair amount of their earnings, so it's not subject to sales tax. Whereas the low income earner spends 100% of their earnings so it's all subject to tax. Yes with the exception of certain items, like food.

I think if we are going to revamp the system we should look at those who have collisions. Police don't attend collisions unless they are real doozies. So you crash there is no cop investigating and giving you a ticket for the violation you committed that cause the crash. BUT if you commit a violation that MIGHT cause a collision, (on the rare occasion a cop is out doing his/her job) you get a ticket because the violation could have caused a collision. Does that make sense to anyone ??????

Now if we could figure out a way to tax/fine/charge the 18 year old driving daddy's Lotus.

[SAILINGONE]

We already have something akin to this with the icbc points system. Get more than 4 or 5 points in a year and you have to pay those points. Get too many points goodbye license.

No, that's a different concept. That's the "frequent flyer program". The more violations the more it costs.

This is the more you earn the more it costs.

So, if you don't show any income, you get a free pass? Is that how it works? That means, every drug dealer, or a career criminal benefits from this ...

Why are they penalizing their successful and law-abiding citizens?

I think you missed the point a bit. A "successful" person would pay more, but they are paying for a ticket, doesn't that indicate they were not "law-abiding".

I have a different take on this. Why do people immediately go for a reduction of the fine for low income. I think the fines are... (wait for it) just fine.

I really don't support this type of system. If I'm well off, I already pay more for property tax (ownership fine), I already (at lease I should) pay more income tax.

Our justice system is intended to level the playing field between the wealthy and not so wealthy, with a lenient pre-trial release system, that unfortunately isn't calibrated to identify (or doesn't care about) the real bad guys.

We tried a system of points only. Everyone got a yearly freebie (2 or 3 points a year were free). Over those 2 or 3 points it began to cost. With ICBC current surcharge for points, we've got the "best" of both worlds, fines and surcharges.

Fines apparently work better than warnings. Hey, and what government doesn't like getting money ?

The only place the wealthy get a break is sales tax. No, not always, when they buy the luxury car or boat they pay through the nose, but if they are large earners, they don't spend a fair amount of their earnings, so it's not subject to sales tax. Whereas the low income earner spends 100% of their earnings so it's all subject to tax. Yes with the exception of certain items, like food.

I think if we are going to revamp the system we should look at those who have collisions. Police don't attend collisions unless they are real doozies. So you crash there is no cop investigating and giving you a ticket for the violation you committed that cause the crash. BUT if you commit a violation that MIGHT cause a collision, (on the rare occasion a cop is out doing his/her job) you get a ticket because the violation could have caused a collision. Does that make sense to anyone ??????

Now if we could figure out a way to tax/fine/charge the 18 year old driving daddy's Lotus.

Thank you and I agree. If you can't effort a fine, then fall in line.
Already enough "equality of outcome" bs.
We all desire a level playing field for availability of opportunity, but please it requires work and not entitlement to receive the fruits.

[Glacier]

https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/413792 ... nforcement
New West backs a new approach to BC traffic enforcement.

I like this idea.
A guy driving a beater, earning minimum wage, fined for speeding gets a $167 fine. Or whatever it is. This fine hurts.

A guy driving a half million dollar supercar, earning high six figures annually gets the same fine. This fine, meh, pocket change.

Should the province consider this?

A client, a super wealthy Asian guy from Kamloops was driving his Ferrari (or whatever it was) down to Vancouver a few years back. Somewhere around Hope he was pulled over for going 200km/h (or something really fast), so his car was immediately impounded. He simply phoned up the nearest dealer, and they sold and delivered him a new car so he could continue on his way. If he were poor this would have been a huge blow, and even potentially financially ruinous.

[BC Landlord]

I think you missed the point a bit. A "successful" person would pay more, but they are paying for a ticket, doesn't that indicate they were not "law-abiding".

No, I have not missed anything. My point was, you are penalizing someone for a traffic violation, just because he/she reports big income, and at the same time rewarding a drug dealer or a career criminal for the same traffic offense, just because that person doesn't have a T4 (the nature of "business").

Where is the logic behind that?