54'000 Euro fine for 15mph over speed limit

[Lord Percy]

BBC News - Finnish millionaire gets huge fine for speeding a little

The jist of it is this:

In Finland, prosecution penalties are based on your income, so high earners pay more for breaking the law.

Personally I think this is a fantastic idea. It means everyone is stung in exactly the same way, based on their own means. Rich people can't ignore the rules and/or buy their way out.

[Matt B]

Excellent idea Due to the fact that I earn feck all I can speed for free
____________________
stinkwheel: He had an animated .gif of a cat performing fellatio. It's not socially acceptable. It can have real life adverse effects on other people.

[Suntan Sid]

AIUI, in the UK, if you plead not guilty and contest an FPN, go to court and lose, your fine is income based. I don't know what the upper limit is or even if there is one.
____________________
"Everybody needs money, that's why they call it money!"

[RhynoCZ]

I do not think this is a good idea and I am not rich.
____________________
'87 Honda XBR 500, '96 Kawasaki ZX7R P1, '90 Honda CB-1, '88 Kawasaki GPz550, MZ 150 ETZ
'95 Mercedes-Benz w202 C200 CGI, '98 Mercedes-Benz w210 E200 Kompressor

[Lord Percy]

[Ste]

14mph over the speed limit.

Businessman Reima Kuisla should have got a better solicitor.

[Rogerborg]

His root error appears to be having declared all that income on his tax return.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike

[Joncrete Cungle]

At what income level might it make financial sense to ignore the NIP and take the rap for failing to furnish / S172 rather than get bummed that hard for speeding?

[Raffles]

Why should a high-achiever pay more than a ne'er-do-well for committing the same offence?
____________________
A good loser will always be a loser.

[Lord Percy]

[RhynoCZ]

[Doovy]

[Lord Percy]

[weasley]

So what is punitive or deterrent about a piffling fine to a wealthy person? You're supposed to want to not do it again, rather than simply pay off any inconvenient paperwork challenges. This is a relative approach, rather than an absolute one - which is right? I like the Finnish approach.
____________________
Yamaha XJ600 | Yamaha YZF600R Thundercat | KTM 990 SMT | BMW F900XR TE

[Raffles]

[kawashima]

64 in a 50 is normal for anyone. Anyone does such speed over.
54,000-euro is a price of Mercedes. I don't think 64 in 50 should cost of a Mercedes. It's just crazy.
In such country(Finland), rich people can't enjoy riding and driving.
I think penalty point given from police is equal to anyone. Then penalty fine should be equal too.
I am not a rich person, but I don't think it's a fair way.
____________________
own:2020 Serow 250
owned: 2012 YB125SP, 2008 TDM900, 2005 W650, 2002 LS125R, 2002 CB400SF, NS50F, C50 / Trip to UK(2009), Hokkaido touring(2013)

[Lord Percy]

[The Wobbly Orange]

In fact most people tend to be more concerned with the points on their license than the fines. I know I am. That's where punishments are fair.
____________________
People tell me I am lovely. How wrong they are!

[wr6133]

Punishment should be proportionate and equal (in its effect) so if chav-mc-ballbag may feel hardship from say a £60 fine then moneybags-mc-taxdodger should be made to feel the exact same level of hardship even if that means the fine in his case is £600000. Otherwise it's not punishment it is just a flat rate tax.

[RhynoCZ]

[Lord Percy]

[barrkel]

If punishment is to be a deterrent, it must hurt equally. So it must cost wealthy people more.

If punishment is to be proportional to the crime, it must cost equally. So it must cost wealthy and poor people the same.

If punishment is to show justice has been done, to prevent people taking the law into their own hands, then it needs to reflect the will of the people. So the collective values of society matter too.

UK laws - like most places with points systems - have a mixed approach. There's a fine which is more or less proportional to the crime, and there's a deterrent, points, which (in principle) hurt everyone equally. The difference is that the equal hurt is not monetary, it's fractional loss of your right to drive.
____________________
Bikes: S1000R, SH350; Exes: Vity 125, PS125, YBR125, ER6f, VFR800, Brutale 920, CB600F, SH300x4
Best road ever ridden: www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2MhNxUEYtQ

[-]

As above, a fine is a deterrent and should deter all motorists equally, no matter what level of disposable income they have.
____________________
TZR250 2MA road, TZR250 1KT road, TZR250 2MA race, TDR250, YZF-750R Boost colours.
Jaguar S Type 3.0 V6 Sport R, VW Transporter T5 GP LWB Shuttle 140ps DSG.

[Tungtvann]

Well, our taxes are a percentage of our earnings, why not our fines? Although my 3 points and £60 fine did it's job, I wonder if I'd have to pay much more on my earnings.

[-Matt-]

Maybe fair in terms of fines being an equal deterant; but I can imagine it could become popular for police to repeatedly target specific areas and groups of people more likely to give better revenue in some cases. If you have a council estate and a financial district in a city - I wonder where they might end up sitting around with the s'cameras out more often - wouldn't be so fair overall then

Perhaps thats just being cynical though