Crime and Punishment

[Birdjaguar]

Well, that's why the state then had to make good on that threat. That's just basic escalation of force. First you threaten something, then if that threat doesn't work you do the thing you threatened to do.

That is an indication that the threats/punishments are inappropriate.

 

[Berzerker]

Imprisonment IS punishment. So it would be a better job than what ? Itself ?

the threat of punishment

 

[Berzerker]

That is an indication that the threats/punishments are inappropriate.

then what would be appropriate?

are speeding limits and tickets inappropriate because people speed and tickets are issued?

 

[Birdjaguar]

then what would be appropriate?

are speeding limits and tickets inappropriate because people speed and tickets are issued?

That is the very question I raised in post #1.

For chronic speeders I might suggest that their car(s) be equipped with a governor that prevents it from going over a preset speed. Or, perhaps a device that monitors their speed and sends it to a central location for 30, 60, or 90 days. Link it with gps to determine what speeds are appropriate. Violations would cost them money.

 

[Akka]

That is an indication that the threats/punishments are inappropriate.

If your criterium that threat/punishment are inappropriate is that some people continue to do it, then there is NOTHING appropriate and I wonder what your solution would be.

 

[Borachio]

That is the very question I raised in post #1.

For chronic speeders I might suggest that their car(s) be equipped with a governor that prevents it from going over a preset speed. Or, perhaps a device that monitors their speed and sends it to a central location for 30, 60, or 90 days. Link it with gps to determine what speeds are appropriate. Violations would cost them money.

You could just make them go to driver re-education classes.

And/or escalate their insurance costs.

Or, if you were serious about speed limits, take their driving licenses away.

Or, like Colonel Gaddafi, make speeding a capital offence.

Or, like North Korea, imprison them and their entire family.

Or, like China (I'm exaggerating here), execute them by firing squad, charge their family for the bullets, and harvest their vital organs.

And if none of that stops them speeding, I'm blowed if I know what will.

 

[EgonSpengler]

You're assuming the purpose of traffic tickets is to discourage the behavior. In many places (here in the US, at any rate) traffic tickets are revenues for the city or town.

 

[Birdjaguar]

You're assuming the purpose of traffic tickets is to discourage the behavior. In many places (here in the US, at any rate) traffic tickets are revenues for the city or town.

Yes it comes down to what one's goals are. If the goal is to reduce speeding, then one path is best; if the goal is to raise revenue, then a different path is best. Clear goals are important.

 

[Berzerker]

the locals goal of raising revenue via tickets aint relevant to drivers, I'm not thinking about defunding the park when avoiding speeding tickets

drive drunk enough and if you keep your license you'll need one of those breath analyzers on the car, so I imagine its just time before repeat speeders get a device to monitor their driving. I dont see many speeders though, the bigger problem are these people driving while texting or talking

 

[Hrothbern]

the locals goal of raising revenue via tickets aint relevant to drivers, I'm not thinking about defunding the park when avoiding speeding tickets

drive drunk enough and if you keep your license you'll need one of those breath analyzers on the car, so I imagine its just time before repeat speeders get a device to monitor their driving. I dont see many speeders though, the bigger problem are these people driving while texting or talking

Some 10 years ago there was a technocrat idea in my government admin to install GPS on all cars to raise motorway tax based on the roads and time you were there instead of a fixed amount per year.
Did not make it
But I see it coming anyway, not only to fine too fast driving but to encourage driving less and slower
just a matter of time

 

[Berzerker]

not a bad idea if you dont mind politicians knowing where you're driving , but I'd rather they just fix roads when they need fixing

could help solve crimes though, somebody gets murdered just ask computer what cars were in the area

 

[Birdjaguar]

Some 10 years ago there was a technocrat idea in my government admin to install GPS on all cars to raise motorway tax based on the roads and time you were there instead of a fixed amount per year.
Did not make it
But I see it coming anyway, not only to fine too fast driving but to encourage driving less and slower
just a matter of time

In the US those actions are designed to replace the fuel tax and shift it from everyone who buys fuel to those who use the roads the most. Those who drive 30,000 miles a year will pay more than those who drive 10,000. A few states are testing that approach.

 

[Hrothbern]

In the US those actions are designed to replace the fuel tax and shift it from everyone who buys fuel to those who use the roads the most. Those who drive 30,000 miles a year will pay more than those who drive 10,000. A few states are testing that approach.

I like such "non-forcing" green actions
The way it is now with high fixed cost per year and little cost per kilometer is encouraging to use the car also when you could instead go walking or bicycling

 

[Borachio]

In the US those actions are designed to replace the fuel tax and shift it from everyone who buys fuel to those who use the roads the most. Those who drive 30,000 miles a year will pay more than those who drive 10,000. A few states are testing that approach.

I don't understand. Don't the drivers who buy the most fuel drive the most miles too?

This isn't quite the case, of course, since some cars are more fuel efficient than others. And then there's people who use the fuel for other things than driving on the road.

But I can't help feeling that those two don't quite fit the bill.

And that those who drive 30,000 miles a year will pay more than those who drive 10,000 even, or especially, with a fuel tax. (The number of cars that are three times more fuel efficient than the average large car is very small.)

I suspect I must be misunderstanding you.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The problem for states is that fuel tax revenue is not keeping up with the needs of highway departments and as cars get more fuel efficient and more electric/hybrid cars enter the market, revenue will fall further. By taxing miles states will be able to collect from non gasoline/diesel vehicles in the future.

This is from an Oregon study. VMT = Vehicle mileage tax:

Spoiler :

2.10 VMT FEE NCHRP Report 377 concluded that VMT fees offer substantial promise as a financing alternative to the motor vehicle fuel tax. Financing road use through a VMT fee has a number of strengths and weaknesses. Similar to the fuel tax, a VMT fee is directly related to vehicle use; provides a stable and predictable revenue stream; and is subject to similar problems regarding inflation. Revenues from a VMT fee are not adversely affected by the proliferation of alternative fuel vehicles or improvements in fuel economy. A VMT fee could be implemented as a supplement to existing fuel taxes or in place of them. It is estimated that a 1-cent fee per mile in the state of California would generate approximately $2.8 billion in annual revenue, nearly as much as the current fuel tax (Adams, et al. 2000). One of the main benefits of the fuel tax is that rates do not vary much from state to state. An important issue with respect to a VMT fee concerns the development of an appropriate method for charging out-of-state drivers and how to control for in-state drivers that travel out-of-state. A VMT fee could be set either as a flat rate or a variable rate fee, though a number of tradeoffs exist. The effect of a flat rate VMT fee on congestion levels is indirect. A flat rate fee fails to address inefficiencies associated with road use because it does not differentiate travel by time or location. On the other hand, a variable rate fee has a number of desirable properties. Not only can the fee be varied by time and location, it can also be structured to take into account costs associated with vehicle weight, energy use, and vehicle emissions. From an economic efficiency standpoint, a variable rate VMT fee is appealing because it can closely approximate the true 11 costs of travel on a per vehicle basis imposed on society. With regard to equity considerations, because lower income persons tend to drive fewer miles, a fee schedule could be designed allowing a base (or lifeline) number of miles to remain untaxed until a certain threshold is reached. The main impediments to implementing a VMT fee relate to political feasibility and administrative costs. The rate structure of a VMT fee program and the actual method used to record and collect information on distance traveled have a large bearing on costs. The simplest collection method could involve reporting of VMT either through voluntary reporting on a predetermined date, or in conjunction with a biennial vehicle inspection program. A major criticism regarding annual reporting of VMT fees is that the fee is far removed from daily travel costs and is therefore not likely to result in significant behavioral changes on the part of drivers. A VMT fee program using advanced technologies such as electronic odometers, AVI/automatic vehicle location (AVL), and smart card technology would allow for other types of payment such as pay at the pump or quarterly billing. Although the costs of advanced technology systems are currently prohibitive, they should decrease substantially over the next several years. In light of these shortcomings, it has been suggested that a VMT fee has medium- to long-term potential as a revenue source for transportation financing, though it is presently inadequate as an alternative to the fuel tax because of the significant administrative burdens it imposes (Adams, et al. 2000).

Link to complete report: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/ResearchReports/AtlMotorFueltax.pdf

 

[Borachio]

Ah. That's true. Electric vehicles.

The next ten years could see a lot of changes.

I'm looking forward to automated driving, as well.