As we’ve covered here before, this sounds like a good idea.
Gov. Sonny Perdue’s “Super Speeder” legislation has hit the track.State Rep. Jim Cole, R-Forsyth, the Governor’s senior floor leader in the Georgia House of Representatives, introduced the legislation (HB 160) to the General Assembly on Tuesday. Under the proposed law, drivers caught driving dramatically higher speeds would pay higher fines in order to fund state trauma care.
The legislation would add an additional $200 fine for driving over 85 MPH anywhere in the state and for driving 75 MPH or more on a two lane road. The law also would increase driver’s license reinstatement fees for drivers committing a second and third offense for violations that result in a suspended license and for other negligent behaviors.
The problem is that those most likely to be super speeders are generally the people least likely to be able to afford to pay the fine.
{ 31 comments }
Going 84 mph on I-285, which is a 55mph speed limit would put you at 29mph over the limit but does not make you a super speeder.
Going 86 in a 70 mph zone, such as I-75 in N. GA, makes you a super speeder even though you’re only going 16mph over the limit.
Where’s the logic in that? Or am I missing something.
Seems as if GSP will become a revenue collector for the state. may as well fold them into the Department of Revenue.
In Japan, 2 speeding tickets in a year invalidates your ability to EVER become a naturalized citizen [you can be deported]. Plus 18 mph over is a mandantory 30 day suspension plus $300 fine . 30 mph over is a minimum $500 fine and 90 day of no driving.
In France 30 mph can cost you $2200 and Finland has a sliding scale depending on income 5% of Gross. $218,000 highest so far for 30mph inexcesss on a Harley.
What does affording a fine have to do with anything. It is supposed to be so very very painful you never even think of doing it again.
Erick, with all due respect, this is a horrible form of governance. To fund something needed by charging fines against you are supposedly against is why there is very little respect for law or its enforcers.
So, does the state then encourage people to speed during a budget crisis, set up more traps to ensnare people just to boost revenue? Crime should be about public safety and public safety only, not getting more money to fund programs. In my world, all money collected as fines from defendants should go to a fund that may only be used to reimburse and help victims for their losses. This way, local and state governments do not make a mockery of the courts by turning them into money mills.
Some say this will discourage local government from enforcing certain laws. Well, if it is truly about public safety, they will. If it is about revenue generation, then I say “good riddance”.
This issue is a crock of s**t! Speeding isn’t such a critical issue that it requires the personal attention of the sitting governor. It’s a red herring to make us think that the Gov is actually trying to fix…something. Why don’t you help rid the state of those here illegally? That might take some real pressure off our already over burdened hospitals? That’s just one meaningful thing that needs to be done. How about trying some type of education reform that might bring GA students up from 50th in national rankings? “Naw, let’s us get them speeders!!” What a joke.
Ditto, what DD saiD!
“The problem is that those most likely to be super speeders are generally the people least likely to be able to afford to pay the fine.”
Proof?
“Crime should be about public safety and public safety only”
Going 85 in a 55 is a serious public safety hazard.
I cruise up & down I-985 at 80mph everyday. People pass me on a regular basis. Driving 85mph on that interstate is not dangerous, but driving recklessly, distracted, or impaired is. People who cause accidents typically are those who don’t see or consider other traffic when changing lanes or those who are distracted by the radio, cell phone, GPS, or whatever.
Making the punishments stiffer for hurting or killing someone else while driving would be a better way to police the highways. Doug’s right about raising revenue–it shouldn’t be done through law enforcement.
“Going 85 in a 55 is a serious public safety hazard.”
Even if everyone on that particular highway is cruising at 75-85 mph?
Rugby,
“Going 85 in a 55 is a serious public safety hazard.”
Proof?
“Doug’s right about raising revenue–it shouldn’t be done through law enforcement”
It’s technically not done through law enforcement but through the courts.
“Even if everyone on that particular highway is cruising at 75-85 mph?”
Yes. There is a reason speed limits are set.
If the super speeder can’t afford the ticked then maybe the state could auction the rims, exhaust noise-maker and spoiler that generally adorn the super-speeder’s car.
“Proof?”
Bill, you went to Tech, you know the calculation to determine the force of a 907kg car (the weight of a current Accord) traveling at 137KmH.
Now that object is traveling in likely confined quarters with other objects traveling at lower speeds with humans in them.
As far as “set asides” and “lock boxes” ect… as a taxpayer I’d like to know if there’s any now that haven’t been pried open and the contents spread around. Naw, I say we make the politicians’ and the bureaucrats’ jobs simpler not more complicated
rugby,
I know there is hardly an action that an authoritarian government is out of bounds doing in your world, save for asking for an idea at the polls, but courts should also not be about raising revenue. When courts have a vested interest (as being part of the government) in the raising of revenue, justice is a sideline consideration.
“I know there is hardly an action that an authoritarian government is out of bounds doing in your world, save for asking for an idea at the polls, but courts should also not be about raising revenue. When courts have a vested interest (as being part of the government) in the raising of revenue, justice is a sideline consideration.”
I don’t think you’ve followed a single thing I’ve ever said but I’ll try again.
The courts decide what your punishment will be when you have a ticket (as I did for running a stop sign).
The judge hears what happens and imposes the penalty. Via previous legislation there are limits or exceptions but the judge (from what I gathered) has the authority to impose a fine or not. That is what I mean by the courts imposing the fine. And Justice (in that instance) was not a “sideline consideration.” This woman in front of me was doing 105 in a 55, had four times lost her license, paid thousands in fines etc, and the judge said time in prison would be the only “just” punishment and he also waived fines for two college-aged kids in lieu of community service.
As an aside, were I in favor of authoritarianism I would be opposed to putting something to the polls, so tautologically your belief is impossible.
If this really is public safety issue and is about prevention, why not slash “GO FISH” and put more troopers on the highways. Seeing those silver and blue cars is the quickest way to slow people down.
I personally would like to see more PSAs about the value of using a turn signal rather than “Click it or Ticket”
rugby,
So, are you on the record that traffic court is something other than a sham? I am not one to go to court all that often, but I am surrounded by a lawyers who basically say no matter how sound your defense is in traffic court most judges will find you guilty for simply being charged.
LIMH
How about weekly PSAs on how to drive in genera?. How many idiots have you seen stopping at a blinking yellow traffic signal who then blow through a non-functional light? Or people who occupy the passing lane so they can act as a blind-spot wing man to the car in front of them? Or people who actually stop in the speed up lane entering the interstate instead of merging?
There is likely a virtue in continuing education where driving is concerned.
“So, are you on the record that traffic court is something other than a sham?”
WTF?
Seriously, WTF?
I mean, HowTF did you reach that conclusion?
So you think it is a sham? If it is, why should we use that mechanism for raising revenue?
There are really only two options here. It should not be that tough to understand.
“So you think it is a sham?”
Dude, I’m still blindsided how someone could make such a ridiculous leap from the above to think that its a sham.
Sorry Doug but that is such sheer idiocy of the Nth degree it doesn’t deserve a response. Keep thinking and misreading whatever the hell you want to.
rugby,
Yeah, it is such a contraversial and outrageous thing to assume you do not think that traffic court is a sham when you praise it to high heaven about it’s ability to dispense justice. And it is high drama to assume the other when you bulk at it. So you are on record unable to take a stand on the status of traffic court. As usual, your opinions are nothing more than noise. Seemingly you just take the opposite stance of what anyone who posts here who might have an R by their name might think.
Exactly.
Well, apology accepted.
Good answer Rugby!
However, I still agree 100% with DD on the speeding laws, traffic court and law enforcement cahoot-ism as a revenue generator. If it was about safety, there are better ways, many of them.
“Good answer Rugby!”
I don’t even know what you are referencing to be able to say this: you are wrong.
I was refering to your one word apology to Doug: Now you owe me one. As you know, libertarians are never wrong. Just ask us. However we’re quite often misunderstood…. we’re use to it.
I’m with DD on this one.
A) Easiest way to slow people down is to see a cop car, period. Even driving down the highway, NOBODY wants to be in front of one – something that was amusing to watch (and participate in) on my 100 mile one way drive to and from work a my old job. If the issue were really public safety, you’d put more cop cars on the roads. (Note here that it need not actually have a cop in it, so long as it is moved every few hours. Actually, this is better on many levels.)
B) I’ve also driven 985 to and from Columbus (when I lived on the other side of Albany, it was the easiest way to and from Cartersville) and can testify to the speeds people achieve on said road. I’ve also gone 90 a few times driving to and from my old job, and people would regularly pass me. That was on I-75 between Cordele and Macon.
C) There is a HUGE difference between going 75 and higher on major highways (not just interstates, but non-congested 4 lane highways, such as GA 300 between Cordele and Albany or US 19 from basically Jonesboro to Ellaville) vs going 75 and higher on residential streets in an in-town area, and any ‘super speeder’ legislation – IF you MUST have some, which I personally say you don’t need to begin with – should address this.
Thanks for the support
BruceBatman.“Bill, you went to Tech, you know the calculation to determine the force of a 907kg car (the weight of a current Accord) traveling at 137KmH.
“Now that object is traveling in likely confined quarters with other objects traveling at lower speeds with humans in them.”
…which means one must know the relative velocity of one vehicle to the other to calculate the potential force applied in a proposed collision.
Yeah, so I just found out that this bill is one of only two that my own Representative (Bob Hanner, D-Parrott) is cosponsoring.
See my previous comments. I’ve driven the two major highways in this district decently often (between Columbus and Cuthbert, and between Columbus and Albany), and seriously y’all, you could redline a Ferrari while driving drunk during ‘rush hour’ on these roads, and by and large the only danger you pose is wrapping yourself around a tree.
Compare that to even Cartersville during rush hour, where you can’t get going fast enough to redline a moped.
Comments on this entry are closed.