JUSTICE in regard to. -Fines, Reparation and Civil Debt

"The fining system we have for even simple traffic fines are far more punishing on the poor than the wealthy.
A minimum wage earner who gets caught by the same camera as a wealthy driver, both commit the exact same offense and fine $180 for the exec the fine is mere lunch money, for the poor driver it might cause eviction of a family, domestic violence etc all ends up costing the taxpayer." I think a flat fine is classist.
Should fines be proportional to income ?

Finland has proportional fines, which are more accomodating to the poor.
As the wealthy are not bothered by a fine of a few hundred dollars, it makes more sense to fine a certain percentage of the weekly or monthly income.

Proportional fine would be better but Id like us to consider not using money as punishment and think more about restorative justice.
For example: Losing the vehicle (not license) for a period of time and ordered to do a driving course of some sort pertaining to the crime.
1% would have to pay driver and car hire - and the rest get public transport.

On the face of it the fixed fine for the same crime seems logical, but when you look at wealth inequity (the gap) to see where it happens in reality, this is one place that the law obviously favors the wealthy. or put another way disproportionately punishes the poor.
Its a joke to talk and defend the legal system as fair, by saying "all are equal before the law" while this happens.

The wealthy more often get "valuable citizen" credit just due to the perception that they contribute more to society. They more often get name suppression
to protect a "good name" in other words spare them family shame and social status loss. The wealthy are more often given lighter sentences, home detention or acquitted or just fined.

The age of the moral wealthy is long gone, the court system and judges attitudes are out of sync.

http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/criminal-justice/restorative-justice/more-information-about-restorative-justice

TRANSFERED

Andrew McPherson in reply to Colin England
I am not arguing with the effectiveness of doing so just whether it should be allowed at since it uses money as a controll device, the very thing we resent being done through wage slavery.
Consider speeding and how many people engage in it and then consider what would happen if we couldn't fine people and get them to pay money for breaking the law. How many people would we be throwing in jail?
What Scandinavian countries do is use traffic fines as set by a percentage of weekly income, I would suggest that each traffic offence / fine applies to one week's income, and so a third offence / fine would apply to three week's income.

So, yes, using money as a control device is an option and often the only practical one available.
Like · Reply · 4 days ago

TRANSFERED

Alan Forster in reply to Andrew McPherson
My car has cruse control, I never get caught speeding. The near future version controls the whole car for the whole journey, lol no speeding fines.
In the future of cars , If you break a law the car will take control off you and take you home for some time out. lol
However collision proof cars will have a bearing on risk taking and extreme stunts etc at the same time.

Even if there are fines, with a UBI / income and the ability to loan ethical money, it would be relatively easy compared to today.
The UBI reduces the deterrent factor of fines, there are side effects and consequences to consider.
Money fines toward an actual repair or replacement of something damaged seem appropriate. Fines should be based on a % of income not a flat rate as it currently is. For a wealth speeder the traffic fine is lunch money but for the poor guy a whole weeks wages. The law favors the rich in fines, this needs fixing everywhere, fines, registrations, rates.
licenses, should all be income weighted or they are discriminatory by wealth, That's not a human right like gender, religion or race but it should be.

Like · Reply · 4 days ago