Finnish sausage king makes history with giant speeding fine

AFP ^ | Tue, Feb 10, 2004

[sausageseller]

And no one pinged me?

I am deeply saddened.

[FreedomCalls]

If you are of modest means, it's more acceptable to endanger other citizens than if you are well-off?

That's a stupid understanding of the intent of the law. Ask yourself does a $120 fine deter a man making $500,000 per year as much as a $120 fine would to a man making $15,000 per year? It would seem that as one supporting identical-value fines that you are the one advocating making it more acceptable to allow rich people to endanger people's lives more than poor people. It would take the rich man 30 minutes to earn $120, the poor man would have to work 2 full days to earn $120.

[Revolting cat!]

Wow, look at the Finns on that vehicle!

[Revolting cat!]

Jussi Salonoja

What? When has Sausage King I abdicated?

[presidio9]

And no one pinged me?

Sorry, I was busy pinging Abe Froman. He is, afterall, "the Sausage King of Chicago."

[Nick Danger]

Let me get this straight. If you are of modest means, it's more acceptable to endanger other citizens than if you are well-off? Unbelievable.

I don't think that's the point. The object of this game is to keep people from engaging in the behavior, not to meter out punishment. Where the average person might think that a $200 fine was worth avoiding, that's chump change to some people. A $200 fine is not going to scare Leona Helmsley. She needs to get whacked for a hundred grand just to make her notice it.

Do you think Martha Stewart cares about getting a parking ticket? That's noise to her. So she gets to park in front of fire hydrants, and you can't. That's not what we wanted. What we wanted was people not blocking the fire hydrants.

[presidio9]

I guess I figured guys named "Jimmy Dean" don't mix too well with threads about driving too fast...

[Revolting cat!]

While being arrested the suspect reportedly exclaimed:
"Hell, sinkin fast am I!" (Finnish grammar obviously differs somewhat from ours.)</snmmall)

[Norman Conquest]

Abe Froeman, the Sausage King of Chicago, might want a word with this Finnish usurper...

[GeronL]

Jimmy Dean sold his sausage company to Sara Lee and they fired him

[southernnorthcarolina]

That's a stupid misunderstanding of the intent of the law.

Thanks so much for the ad hominem attack. God knows, that's why I come to Free Republic to venture an opinion upon occasion.

It is almost beyond belief that someone could come to a conservative forum and advance a notion which is so, well, stupid. Do you really subscribe to the notion that civil penalties should be levied in accordance to the state's judgment as to your ability to pay? That no doubt would be a popular notion at DU.

I have little doubt that the perp is a spoiled brat. Perhaps he even considers himself "above the law." But a "progressive" fine system won't stop his behavior. A license suspension on the second offense, however, might. And that's what should happen, whether the offender is a billionaire or destitute.

The object of traffic laws is the improvement of public safety, not income redistribution. The young man, assuming he was indeed guilty of his offense, endangered life and property. But not a bit more than would have an an impecunious wretch. To attempt to commingle law enforcement with class warfare is to enter onto a slippery slope which will lead to no good end.

[southernnorthcarolina]

Thank you for your response, Nick. I appreciate the ability to disagree without attacking.

As I said in a response above, I don't think graduated fines would be effective. A $200 fine, or a $2,000 fine, or a $20,000 fine wouldn't get Leona's or Martha's attention. What would get their attention would be a license suspension or a pulling of their motor vehicle permit on the second or third offense. And that's what should happen, be the offender Leona, or Leona's upstairs maid.

I have an instinctive dislike, as I'd bet the vast majority of FReepers do, to the meting out of "justice" based on one's ability to pay. That, it seems to me, comes mighty close to boilerplate Marxism.

[ApplegateRanch]

That's a stupid understanding of the intent of the law. Ask yourself does a $120 fine deter a man making $500,000 per year as much as a $120 fine would to a man making $15,000 per year?

Let's see; if it takes the rich man 30 minutes to earn a $120 fine vs 2 days for your 'poor man' (who has most of his needs provided by the state's confiscation of the rich man's "excess" earnings) then would you also apply the same standard to jail time??? After all, "time IS money".

Mr Marx & Co would be proud to hear it.

[FreedomCalls]

No, I quoted the stupid part which was the phrase "it's more acceptable [for poor people] to endanger other citizens than if you are well-off" and pointed out that the same argument could be directed back on you from the point of view of the current system as allowing the current system we have to be more acceptable for rich people to "endanger other citizens." It is a stupid and flawed position to take. I personally didn't take sides, I simply showed you the error of the logic you used to advance your side. I'm actually trying to improve your argumentative skills.

Now in this post you have actually advanced a better argument -- one that I won't contradict since it is a little better thought out. See how visiting Free Republic has improved you already?

[FreedomCalls]

I have an instinctive dislike, as I'd bet the vast majority of FReepers do, to the meting out of "justice" based on one's ability to pay.

Isn't that just what the current criminal justice system provides? You get the justice your wallet can afford -- pay the high-priced lawyers, you get off; use a court-appointed attorney, you go to jail.

[FreedomCalls]

would you also apply the same standard to jail time???

That's the way it currently works isn't it? Who gets longer sentences now -- the white collar embezzler working for Global Crossing stealing multi-millions or the bank robber stealing thousands?

[ApplegateRanch]

False analogy.

What is posited is a poor man & a rich man being convicted of EQUAL crimes, and giving the rich man a proportionately longer sentence, based on his earnings.

Many sentences are in terms of either X dollars OR Y days.

[small voice in the wilderness]

The price of the fine was scaled to his income

The only way he could afjord a fine this big.

[southernnorthcarolina]

It is a stupid and flawed position to take.

Again, thanks so much. Very classy, and right in line with the long-established standards of FReeper discourse.

I personally didn't take sides...

You could have fooled me.

...I simply showed you the error of the logic you used to advance your side. I'm actually trying to improve your argumentative skills.

Oh, thank you, Massah! I be's so ig'nrant that I dassan't know how to state mah case. Thank you so very much for he'pin' me see da light.

You are defending what any conservative worthy of the name would abhor. Equal justice under the law doesn't mean "relatively" equal, or "equal according to one's ability to pay." It mean equal. A concept which seems to elude some, which doesn't surprise me. But what does surprise me is that proponents of Scandinavian class warfare have found their way to this board.

[A. Pole]

If you are of modest means, it's more acceptable to endanger other citizens than if you are well-off?

Do you really think that $200 fine has the same meaning for a elderly person on Social Security that it has for Bill Gates? Paying the percentage of income will hurt equally.