I don’t often talk about local issues, but the new “abusive driver fees” our state government has cooked up merit some discussion. For those who aren’t aware, the Virginia General Assembly has decided that it’s time “bad drivers” pay big for their offense. They have instituted civil “fees” that are applied separately from and on top of the fines and punishments already in place for driving infractions. These fees can total up to as much as just over $3000 for one offense and offenses range from the fairly benign, like speeding or not using your turn signal, to the more extreme such as DUI. Needless to say, the law is already being challenged in court, several petitions against it have appeared, and several lawmakers (who trumpeted their support of the bill initially) are now trying to distance themselves from it.
I have no problem with justice being served. I’m generally a law abiding citizen, but I speed from time to time. The thing is, if I get pulled for speeding, I acknowledge that I was breaking the law and wouldn’t have a problem paying the ticket. That all changes when the punishments no longer match the crime.
Let’s look at it this way: let’s say you steal a pack of gum. It was a bad idea to do, and I don’t think you’d find anybody who would tell you you’d done the right thing, but really the harm was minimal. But the shopkeeper saw you and came running out of the store after you. Most of you would probably acknowledge that you made a bad decision, pay for the gum, maybe a bit more for his trouble, then go on your way. But how might your response change if you knew that getting caught with the gum would leave you with a $1000 fine? A $5000 fine? Jail time? Death? Having already taken the gum in a moment of weakness, I suspect most of us, at some point, would decide to take our chances running rather that pay a horribly disproportionate cost for our indiscretion. Now take that runner and put them behind the wheel of a motor vehicle, and you see why amplifying penalties to absurd proportions can be a dangerous proposition. Justice is served by giving appropriate sanctions for crimes committed. Nothing is served by leveling massive fees for the smallest of offenses.
Of course, all of that assumes that the goal of the legislation is justice. It isn’t, and the politicians aren’t even trying to hide that fact. This is about one thing and that’s generating revenue for the state. For one thing, these penalties are being billed as “fees” not “fines.” The money from fines goes to education, but our legislators have other plans for the money they collect through these civil penalties, so to avoid having to spend the money they make from this lucrative scam on schools, they’ve decided that these are “fines” but “fees.” If this is about serving justice and keeping us safe, why the need to direct the funds obtained through the legislation to anywhere other than where all the traffic fines go?
Another by product of the “fee” system is the fact that it’s simply not so easy to collect “fees” from non-Virginia residents as it is to collect “fines.” To solve this they simply exempted no-Virginia residents from having to pay the fees in the first place. Get that? The politicians want to “keep us safe” from Virginia drivers, but when the guy in the car behind us is from Maryland (or elsewhere), we’re on our own. How is selectively fining (I’m sorry, “feeing”) drivers from only within state keeping us safer again? If the state has legitimate need of more funding, then simply raise taxes and try to convince the voters of the need before the next election. Creating money-making legislation in the name of “keeping us safe” isn’t the way to go about it.
Erhm….methinks you’ve been brainwashed along with the rest of the residents in your state on the logistics of this new fine system.
To make your analogy more correct, you’d have to have gotten caught shoplifting gum MULTIPLE times…not once, not twice.
The new fines in Virginia go strictly after habitual, dangerous drivers who are the types of aggressive, reckless folks that have caused many of us to nearly get into what could be fatal accidents. More importantly, they are the same types of people who DO kill others on the road through their reckless disregard behind the wheel.
The new fines aren’t about punishing those of us who get the occasional ticket once a decade. They never have been.
As far as where the money from the fines is going (to improve Northern Virginia’s disgusting excuse for a transportation infrastructure), that is the direct product of the worthless General Assembly that has been more concerned with protecting Virginian’s from gay marriage than filling in those massive potholes and fixing ungodly congestion problems in their half of I-495.
The transportation issue in VA has gone un-touched for far, far too long. Either raise taxes, make major cuts in exisiting local government programs or use these new “fees” or “fines.” Bottom Line — your state needs this money *BAD*.
On a last note, I personally think a plan like this should be rolled out nationwide. I’d love to see those jerks who weave in and out of traffic at 85MPH nearly clipping cars having to dish out thousands (or more) in fines to make the roads safer for the rest of us.
-Gary
Actually, you’re buying into what the politicians who voted for the legislation are SAYING (now that the public has voiced their displeasure) the law says versus what it actually says. The fees ARE based on a point system, meaning that people with multiple smaller infractions will be charged the horrific fees, BUT one-time offenders can also be charged. For example, if I forget to use my turn signal (which in my case won’t happen as I use my turn signals out of habit) and hit somebody in my blindspot, I will be forced to pay the outrageous fees, FIRST OFFENSE. The new fees hit repeat and first-time offenders alike, but I still think the penalty should match the crime either way. We don’t shoot a jay walker whether it’s the first time he’s done it or the 100th time.
As I noted in my post, if the state needs money, there are more appropriate way of getting it. I’d much rather pay a couple of bucks more in taxes than be killed in an accident because some speeder decided that $3000 (on top of normal fines and sanctions) was worth the risk of running from the police. If the state is concerned about my safety, they might consider keeping me safe from out of state drivers as well. I guess our politicians figure Virginians can only be killed in auto accidents with other Virginians?
For too many people who are living paycheck to paycheck, a blow like a $3000 fee (again on top of whatever they’d normally get) will seem (and in some cases be) the end of their world (nobody wants to live on the streets yet for many that is exactly what it will mean). If you think those “jerks who weave in and out of traffic at 85MPH nearly clipping cars” are dangerous now, try giving them “nothing to lose” by running from police. Fear-based deterrents aren’t especially effective at their best. Absurd fear-based deterrents are more likely to encourage bad behavior than deter it.
Dolph —
My apologies for taking so long to respond. I’ve been crazy busy at work lately, but also wanted to dig even deeper into this controversy.
The new fees *do not* hit first time offenders for small traffic violations, such as failing to signal. That is simply incorrect. Should you fail to signal and be pulled over AFTER having been pulled over for reckless driving the day before, then you do have a point. That said, I would fully agree with the fee.
Scenerio #1: You are pulled over for speeding in a 55mph zone while you are doing 65mph. You have not been pulled over recently for other traffic offenses.
RESULT: Normal fine. No special fines.
Scenerio #2: You are pulled over for speeding in a 55mph zone while you are doing 80mph.
RESULT: Even if a first offense, you’ll likely be eligible for the new, higher fees.
Scenerio #3: You are pulled over for speeding in a 55mph zone while doing 64mph. You were just pulled over last week for the same reason.
RESULT: You’ll pay the higher fees.
The more I research these new fees that Virginia is proposing, the more I support them. I think that we can all agree that those of us who are pulled over more frequently for traffic offenses in a short period of time, therefore raking up more points on the license, are by default more dangerous drivers.
These fees do, in fact, target at a much higher weight the drivers out there who are going 80MPH on the beltway, weaving in and out of traffic, drunk driving, tailgating, etc.
And, in cases like this, the punishment DOES match the crime. We’re not talking about jay-walking. We’re talking about being in control of a vehicle that weighs more than a ton and is hurtling down the road at dangerous speeds. One miscalculation due to negligence can cost another person or an entire family their lives.
By setting the standard/expectation early on in someone’s driving life that such behavior behind the wheel is entirely unacceptable and will be aggressively punished, I feel that Virginia is actually offering a far better deterrent to future crime.
As a failsafe, remember that the officer pulling drivers over often has a large degree of leverage for points/punishment left to his or her sole discretion, within reason of course. Many police officers already limit the number of points to the minimum required by law for regular traffic stops, and frequently “doctor” tickets to avoid charging drivers with serious crimes for speeding. One would reason that this practice will continue into the future, and an officer pulling you over for failing to signal is not going to slap you with the extra points that will result in a $1,000 fine.
As I said before, I do agree with the argument that these new laws are unjust in that they are only being enforced against Virginia residents. I personally feel they should be spread nationwide, and be enforced against ALL citizens. This country has far too serious of a problem with aggressive drivers in massive SUVs or sport cars feeling as though they are superior, own the road and drive through intimidation of others via tailgating, reckless speeding, etc. New rules such as this would seriously combat a growing problem.
Last, but not least — no one has EVER run from the police to avoid a fine, even in cases where they knew they were talking about $1,000+. People run from the police because they are drunk behind the wheel and know it, because they shouldn’t be driving with a suspended license, or because they’ve just committed a crime, etc. That will continue to be the case in the future. I highly doubt any normal driver would be stupid enough to try and outrun the police to avoid a fine, regardless of the amount. Time has shown that those running from the police are doing so with a criminal reason in mind; and not to avoid a hefty fine for a traffic violation.
If you want some good, unbiased information on the subject, go to:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/22/AR2007062201781.html
-Gary
PS —
Straight from The Washington Post:
“….Standard traffic infractions, such as low-level speeding and running a stop sign, do not carry the fees. The state courts posted the fees and eligible offenses this month.”
-Gary
That’s the same article I link to in my post.
Basically it comes down to this. I know what violations the laws cover, I’d had several conversations with a police officer friend of mine prior to writing this post on exactly what kind of offenses and in what circumstances the fees will be leveled against drivers. I assure you that if you don’t use your turn signal and hit somebody, you WILL be fined (or “fee’d”) first offense.
Also on the topic of running from the police, why do you think it is people run from the police when “they are drunk behind the wheel and know it, because they shouldn’t be driving with a suspended license, or because they’ve just committed a crime?” It’s because they want to avoid the steep punishment that goes with such crimes. If you take the same level of punishment and assign it to lesser offenses, you’ll see people start running for those lesser offenses.
I do think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the appropriateness of a given punishment for a crime. I think reasonable people can disagree on what is an appropriate punishment is for any given crime, but I can assure you that you won’t convince me that 3 Grand is an appropriate punishment for speeding.
“Also on the topic of running from the police… It’s because they want to avoid the steep punishment that goes with such crimes. If you take the same level of punishment and assign it to lesser offenses, you’ll see people start running for those lesser offenses.”
I would argue that they are running from the police to avoid prison, not a fine. The two carry a very, very different stigma in society.
On everything else, of course, we simply have a different opinion and can agree to disagree.
You’re wrong, of course.
Just kidding
Hope all is well on your end!
-Gary