A Swiss driver has just been slammed with what may be the heaviest speeding fine ever levied anywhere. The BBC reports:
A Swiss millionaire has been handed down a record speeding fine of $290,000 (£180,000) by a court.
The man was reportedly caught driving a red Ferrari Testarossa at 137km/h (85mph) through a village.
The penalty was calculated based on the unnamed motorist's wealth - assessed by the court as $22.7m (£14.1m) - and because he was a repeat offender.
It is more than double Switzerland's previous record speeding fine - handed to a Porsche driver in Zurich in 2008.
There's more at the link.
I'm not sure I like the thought of a fine being assessed in relation to one's personal wealth. That smacks of 'one law for the rich and one for the poor' - or different penalties, anyway - which brings into question the doctrine of 'equality before the law'. What say you, readers?
Peter
8 comments:
This is where we are headed unless we fire the liberal incumbents. I really can't stand it when laws are enacted, or penalties imposed based on feelings.
I'm not sure, but that may be why the Brits don't allow self-defense anymore. They (we?) don't have the sense God gave a goat.
Thanks.... Now I sound exactly like my dad!!!!
While I don't agree with it, I can understand the logic behind the fine - the normal fine clearly isn't enough to discourage him since he is a repeat offender.
Of course, I think it would be more sensible to revoke his license. If that doesn't work, toss him in jail.
Like Chris, I understand it. I'm not sure I agree, but I understand it.
The guy clearly doesn't get the message, since he's a repeat offender. And any normal traffic fine is pocket change to him.
It's kind of like NFL players and the fines they face. Most of them earn millions per year, so a fine of $5,000 to $10,000 really isn't that much to them. Sure, it hurts, but it isn't $290,000.
Overall, I think jail time or perhaps an "impounding of the car on the third offense" type of thing might be more effective.
"I'm not sure I like the thought of a fine being assessed in relation to one's personal wealth."
I am not either, but then again, I am against income tax rates dependant on the size of your income as well. Oh, heck truth be told, I am against income tax...
But, I could see a person of a statist mindset thinking that this is a wonderful idea.
Let us see: Equality before the law.
For the sake of an argument let's take to persons of different wealth: A has $100,000 and B has $10,000,000.
If a fixed fine of $1,000 is imposed on both, that would be 1% for A and 0.01% for B, of their respective wealth. That seems to be a far lesser fine for B than for A, even though in absolute monetary terms both have to pay the same fine. So for arguments sake, we could state that A has to pay a far higher fine then B.
Now if a fine of 0.5% of personal wealth is imposed on both, that would be $500 for A and $50,000 for B. Again, there is an apparent in-equality with B paying a far higher fine than A, even though both have to pay the same proportion of their wealth.
In real life we also find that B with his higher wealth and resources is able to retain a better lawyer to find the loopholes in the law and also for an appeal to reduce the fine even further.
Also Peter should be able to confirm that the prison population is likely composed mostly of "poorer" criminals - who do the dirty work - who do not have to resources for a good legal defense, instead of the "real" criminals who are the masterminds and financiers of crime, becuase these have the financial resources to protect and defend themselves.
"So, if I do your dirty work, I run the risk and you reap the benefits."
So, maybe for the sake of equallity (of pain) before the law, a fine expresed in a percentage of personal wealth or income might be better than a fixed amount fine. ==> social equality.
Food for thought.
+1 Mario. This guy could afford to speed all day, and pay the annoying "little" fines imposed. In practical terms, he was above the law.
Mario and JimBob are speaking of egalitarianism. In other words, equality of income or fines. Our legal system doesn't note this. It notes that all people are subject to the law equally.
Egalitarian society is not what we are about. That was the basis for the French Revolution, not created equal, but made equal. You can see it in Communism as well. From one according to his means, to one according to his needs. An attempt to make everyone equal in their income. Also, the transfer of wealth thru the welfare system.
It's unAmerican. We are equal by virtue of our birth, not our portfolios. Each American has the freedom to succeed or fail or just be mediocre. Bill Gates got rich by having an idea and the ability to make it work. Not because he was born to the right family or proper caste.
Poor education yields these kinds of ideas. If the guy is a menace, pull his license. Easily done. Don't graduate the fine structure based on your arbitrary decision of who's rich and who isn't.
The last time I suffered thru that, Bill Clinton said I was rich, making 30K a year with 3 kids. Just about bankrupted my family with that wonderful retroactive tax increase!!
STxRynn: What office are you running for? You have my vote!
Post a Comment