Anonymous wrote:Why should a family be plunged into the red over a traffic ticket?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC's transition to full communism is almost complete.
I missed the proposal for nationalizing the means of production.
Anonymous wrote:DC's transition to full communism is almost complete.
Anonymous wrote:If someone can't pay ticket, do community service in weekends.
Anonymous wrote:It's already income based because poor people don't pay the tickets right now.
BTW, for all the super slow drivers out there, you don't get a ticket unless you're going more than 10 over. It's not written into law (like Maryland's tolerance of 12 over is), but DC is on record as saying this is the threshold. I always go 8-9 over on 16th street, where the speed limit is artificially low at 30.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:So the income based fine is what is controversial here and not the fact that she is more than doubling the number of traffic cameras? All in an effort to balance the budget.
Yeah I do have a problem with this. I also don’t think it will work. And if she is going for equity it seems inequitable to those who have to work in person versus those residents who can work from home. They won’t get as many tickets. I’m just going to keep pointing out inequities for each proposal she has because all of this is getting absurd. Meanwhile there were ATVs speeding all over my neighborhood all evening last night. I’m sure they’ll be real upset and stop speeding when they get all those tickets.
Anonymous wrote:It's already income based because poor people don't pay the tickets right now.
BTW, for all the super slow drivers out there, you don't get a ticket unless you're going more than 10 over. It's not written into law (like Maryland's tolerance of 12 over is), but DC is on record as saying this is the threshold. I always go 8-9 over on 16th street, where the speed limit is artificially low at 30.
Anonymous wrote:Just curious if you have heard about this new proposed law for DC. Basically if you were to receive a ticket from a traffic camera you would get a $100 fine. If you can prove that you have a lower Household income, the price you would have to pay would be on a sliding scale. My ticket could be $100, yours could be $20.
More controversially, Mayor Bowser wants to use more than a half-billion dollars worth of revenue from a planned expansion of traffic cameras — which target speeding, red light-running, stop sign violations, and more — to help close the four-year budget gap. Under a traffic safety plan approved by the D.C. Council, the number of cameras across the city is expected to leap from 140 now to almost 500 in the coming years. But Bowser is also creating a task force to consider options of how to mitigate the cost of steep traffic camera fines on low-income drivers (including a possible sliding scale of fines depending on income) ...
I am of the camp that says "do the crime, pay the time". Why should people that break the law be treated defiantly based on income?
Thoughts?
Anonymous wrote:This is how fines should work for moving and non-moving violations, but for the first time only. No discounts for subsequent offenses.
Too often, unpaid traffic fines put poor people on a cycle of escalating penalties that they can’t escape. They fail to pay the fine because they don’t have the money, and then they accrue penalties, putting payment further out of reach. Eventually, their tags or licenses are suspended, exposing them to more expensive fines and potentially arrest outside of DC.