- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Excellent!
Serves him right
- Thread starter stockhausen
- Start date
serves the fool right
Unless the driver was stopped by a solid object in a mangled mess of metal then it obviously was controllable.
It is an interesting concept though fining the driver depending on their wealth although I can't make up my mind whether it is one I support or not.
It is an interesting concept though fining the driver depending on their wealth although I can't make up my mind whether it is one I support or not.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
lol stockhausen
Took a few replies, but some sense at last!
If I quote these enough will stockhausen stop?
Took a few replies, but some sense at last!
[TW]Fox;17150945 said:
If I quote these enough will stockhausen stop?
No, you can't reason someone out of irrational hatred.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 829
What a ridiculous fine.
People need to seriously start getting a grip on reality when it comes to victimless crimes. Harm to others should be one of the factors in determining peoples punishement.
I could go out and punch an ugly fat girl in the face, spit on her, and throw her around a bit. I would end up in court, but would probably get off with a suspended sentance and a small fine. She could be traumatised for the rest of her life and it could seriously mess her up.
On the other hand with our Mickeymouse justice system, I could be caught doing 166mph on a bike, and sentanced to 9 months in PRISON for causing no hurt to anyone, with no victim and no trauma.
Logical eh?
Still I would rather pay an enormous fine than get banned via the gay points system we have in the UK.
People need to seriously start getting a grip on reality when it comes to victimless crimes. Harm to others should be one of the factors in determining peoples punishement.
I could go out and punch an ugly fat girl in the face, spit on her, and throw her around a bit. I would end up in court, but would probably get off with a suspended sentance and a small fine. She could be traumatised for the rest of her life and it could seriously mess her up.
On the other hand with our Mickeymouse justice system, I could be caught doing 166mph on a bike, and sentanced to 9 months in PRISON for causing no hurt to anyone, with no victim and no trauma.
Logical eh?
Still I would rather pay an enormous fine than get banned via the gay points system we have in the UK.
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;17150945 said:
The fine is meant to act as a deterrent. Someone with a net worth of £10m isn't going to care about a £60 fine, but a £600,000 fine they will. The idea is that you don't do it in the first place, nothing to do with penalising rich people - it intends to penalise everyone equally, regardless of wealth.
What if the law is unjust in the first place? What if the behaviour problem is massively exaggerated?
Last edited:
This is what I believe, but this will probably descend into the usual anti rich bashing farce.
For what it's worth I think the punishment is too extravagant, but I believe you should be fined a percentage of your wage for instance (Might not be exactly correct if you have £10m in the back and have retired and work at Tesco for fun, but I'm not about to come up with a parliamentary ready solution on my tea break). It's not about punishing the rich for their success, it's about an using an acceptable deterrant to punish idiots.
It's a punishment at the end of the day, and how much the law affects you shouldn't be scalable due to your wealth.
Thats fair enough, but a seperate issue.
Last edited:
His car has been impounded, too.
Cheaper to buy another one.