Finnish millionaire gets 111,888-euro speeding ticket

[shad_68]

so how does these work in night? nightvision?

The one I heard of uses an IR flash.

I wouldn't be too surprised if it was just a fancy name for induction coils

I think that's what I've heard. Or some other sensor in the road surface.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Yes.

Well I guess that is where we fundamentally disagree and I haven't the time nor energy to try and convince you otherwise since you obviously strongly believe in what your country does and I do the same with mine.

 

[BoxrDiesel]

Well I guess that is where we fundamentally disagree and I haven't the time nor energy to try and convince you otherwise since you obviously strongly believe in what your country does and I do the same with mine.

I think its a great system (the one here in Finland). It really makes rich people think before they intentionally raise theyre speed above the speed limit.
If they would be fined the same amount as anyone else, would they care? I know i wouldn't..
I cant remember what happened with the guy who got the 111k? ticket but i think he shouldnt have to pay it, since hes not making money as he was last year.

 

[DarkReaper]

Passive sensors? I wonder what that is. I wouldn't be too surprised if it was just a fancy name for induction coils or average speed cameras.

The article in German isn't very specific about it but it seems to measure the difference in light incidence. So I guess that it has image recognition software that compares several images and measures the cars speed by comparing pixels over time.

I have no idea how it is supposed to work in bad weather conditions or at night though. Maybe the article is just talking BS.

 

[H0nzik]

The one I heard of uses an IR flash.

The average speed cameras in the tunnels here are fitted with something that looks like twinkling red LED lights, which are constantly on. I suppose this somehow substitutes for the flash but I have no idea how it's supposed to work.

The article in German isn't very specific about it but it seems to measure the difference in light incidence. So I guess that it has image recognition software that compares several images and measures the cars speed by comparing pixels over time.

I have no idea how it is supposed to work in bad weather conditions or at night though. Maybe the article is just talking BS.

Yeah, I've heard about that. Though IIRC, it wasn't considered accurate enough to be used as evidence against speeders last time I heard about it.

 

[argatoga]

The guys fined take these to court almost every time and almost everytime they also win and end up paying a couple of hundred euros.

It is pretty easy to get out of tickets over here. Just show up and call some witnesses who will never show up and you win by default.

 

[MXM]

Well I guess that is where we fundamentally disagree and I haven't the time nor energy to try and convince you otherwise since you obviously strongly believe in what your country does and I do the same with mine.

Oh, I don't want convincing, nor do I want to convince anyone. There are different opinions and that's fine. I asked you to argument yours, and your explanation seems to say that money has the same value for everyone. Either that, or you say that rich people deserve less harsh punishments for same offenses.

It's one or the other, logically.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Oh, I don't want convincing, nor do I want to convince anyone. There are different opinions and that's fine. I asked you to argument yours, and your explanation seems to say that money has the same value for everyone. Either that, or you say that rich people deserve less harsh punishments for same offenses.

It's one or the other, logically.

You want my opinion? Ok.

My opinion is that there is no traffic offense worth more than one hundred thousand euros. Systems that make the rich pay more simply because they have the means annoying the crap out of me. Just because somebody worked harder does not mean that they should have to pay more for the same relatively trivial offense such as doing 13 mph over the limit.

If you want to punish them, what is wrong with points in your license? After X number of points, you lose you license, that simple. That would be a much better deterrent than trying to bankrupt people with speeding tickets.

 

[motogpboy]

I suppose after reading all of this I'm thankful I don't have to drive in Europe every day. When I lived in Italy I used public transport only as well as when I was in England.

I'll take my loosely regulated driving laws in California thank you

 

[MXM]

Points work, sure. But we are discussing only the fine part here. And I don't want to go to the speed limits argument and the severity of this one. I'm just talking about how a person should be fined for any offense. Say running a red light, something that no one should do (we all agree, I hope) whatever you stand on speeding is

What traffic offense is worth? Worth for whom? You're still talking about it as something having a value.
The offense in my view is worth a punishment which makes the receiver less likely to repeat it. Working for free for a week will certainly make me think about it. Paying 10% of monthly salary will as well. Paying 0.01% of monthly salary will go entirely unnoticed. So just tell me what's wrong with this reasoning? How would someone earning millions a month will be less likely to repeat his offense if he knows it's only worth something like 200 for him.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Points work, sure. But we are discussing only the fine part here. And I don't want to go to the speed limits argument and the severity of this one. I'm just talking about how a person should be fined for any offense. Say running a red light, something that no one should do (we all agree, I hope) whatever you stand on speeding is

I'd like to think that people don't break the law because running red lights is really stupid and dangerous, same thing with speeding in a lot of conditions.

What traffic offense is worth? Worth for whom? You're still talking about it as something having a value.
The offense in my view is worth a punishment which makes the receiver less likely to repeat it. Working for free for a week will certainly make me think about it. Paying 10% of monthly salary will as well. Paying 0.01% of monthly salary will go entirely unnoticed. So just tell me what's wrong with this reasoning? How would someone earning millions a month will be less likely to repeat his offense if he knows it's only worth something like 200 for him.

It just seems wrong, I really can't explain why right now, or maybe my brain is just fried from classes.

Maybe because I'd like to think that the guilt of having done wrong and having been caught should be punishment enough instead of having to shell out a lot of money.

I distrust governments, and giving a government such a large sum of money for speeding or any other thing seems wrong. If you want to punish somebody, I don't think going after their wallet is the right way to do it. Community service, jail time, points would all make me more careful than knowing that I could write a check, no matter how big and make it all go away.

Sorry if my inane ramblings don't make sense, as I said earlier, my brain is a bit fried

 

[Ladamaha]

Maybe because I'd like to think that the guilt of having done wrong and having been caught should be punishment enough instead of having to shell out a lot of money.

Guilt for doing a bit over the speed limit in the land with most World Rally and Formula 1 Champions per capita. Where everyone thinks he was born one. :lol:

Only way to make it hurt is to go for your pocket. The rich idiot will not learn from his mistake with a small fine if he uses the same amount of money on soap per week.

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Guilt for doing a bit over the speed limit in the land with most World Rally and Formula 1 Champions per capita. Where everyone thinks he was born one. :lol:

Only way to make it hurt is to go for your pocket. The rich idiot will not learn from his mistake with a small fine if he uses the same amount of money on soap per week.

Did you read the rest of my post? I still think people should be punished, just not with outrageous fines.

 

[matskulainen]

Where everyone thinks he was born one. :lol:

What do you mean thinks? (Almost) everyone was!

 

[Ladamaha]

Did you read the rest of my post? I still think people should be punished, just not with outrageous fines.

Actually I did and I agree. I actually wrote something to respond to that, but then I deleted it because I thought I was rambling on too much and was contradicting on what I wrote earlier.

It's not easy to change such old system though. There's been some talk about introducing points, but I haven't heard anything for a while now. I guess the government is happy enough fining people with speed cameras and introducing zero-tolerance speeding zones.

But again, it's not speeding what's the problem on the road. It's the tip of the ice berg, and fining and monitoring speeds will not change the behavior and the way people drive. They only learn how to avoid speed cameras and drive like idiots between them.

I think community service could serve as a good punishment for the worst idiots. Especially for drunk drivers who hardly get a slap on the wrist even doing it every second weekend.


Now you made me ramble, happy now?

 

[Crazyjeeper]

Now you made me ramble, happy now?

Yes

 

[Twerp128]

Man, I thought Finland was supposed to be cool.

So in theory, a poor person with no job and a shit car can drive as fast as he likes, but rich people cannot. How is that fair? Progressive speeding tickets, what is the world coming to!

 

[Brother Michael]

Community service wouldn't be a good solution; it would cost too much to upkeep and the Finnish government isn't that big on spending money on anything useful, being the idiots they are.

I think a points system similar to the UK should be introduced, because losing your license would really make people think twice before doing stupid things, especially the sort of middle management-sales rep type of people who drive Volvo V70s, BMW 3/5 series, Merc E-class and so on. They are by far the biggest single group of offenders that I can think of. And while they do make fairly good amounts of money, they are not exactly filthy rich, so their fines are rather low. However these people need their cars to do their jobs. If you take their car away, you also relieve them of their income and the company management may not look too kindly to that sort of behaviour.

Zero tolerance for speeding is stupid and useless, because as mentioned before on a million occasions, nobody will follow a speedlimit they find useless and stupid; and I fully admit I am one of those people. Then again the only offence I ever do is speeding, otherwise I try to drive in as civilised manner as possible, even if carrying some speed at the same time.

The points system, I think, is great and especially here it would be useful: it is almost impossible to lose your license here. It takes some serious effort to get your license taken away - drunk driving gets the job done easily, but other than that it is very difficult.

I still think the fine system we have going on at the moment is rubbish, because it is unfair, plain and simple. While I do agree, that for a highly paid CEO a 500? fine is next to nothing, it doesn't make it right to charge him 10.000? for the same crime as a student for example, because, on principle then we could just as well do it with other stuff as well: different sentences for a murder for example. I know that's exaggerating and not a reasonable argument, but on the basis of principle, it could be done.

If it stays this way it should at least be changed so that you get fined according to your current income and then pose a limit as to how high the fine could go.

And people who drive recklessly rarely get caught and they might pay a couple of hundred euros every six months for tickets and be done with it, continueing their idiotic ways. But with a genuine fear of losing one's permit to drive....now that would surely clean up some illmannered driving habits.

 

[Ladamaha]

^ Good rant. Can agree.

As far as I know, they can't take away your license for good if you need it for your job. It's ridiculous.

Putting the wankers back to driving school and retake their test and have proper driving bans would be good. The point system could also work. But there is so much wankers on the roads who just can't be caught on cameras because they only monitor speed, not the wankerness of the driver. The focus on speed is just ridiculous, but hey, I guess it's the cheapest.

 

[MXM]

Man, I thought Finland was supposed to be cool.

So in theory, a poor person with no job and a shit car can drive as fast as he likes, but rich people cannot. How is that fair? Progressive speeding tickets, what is the world coming to!

No, he gets a a basic rate. And considering he has no job, it will hurt him as well.

Oh, and 3 offenses in a year (or is it 2 years?) will get your license suspended.

...because, on principle then we could just as well do it with other stuff as well: different sentences for a murder for example. I know that's exaggerating and not a reasonable argument, but on the basis of principle, it could be done.

I really don't see how can you make such a leap. The whole purpose of income-based fines is to equalize the effect of the fine. Different sentences have nothing to do with equality, everyone has the same one life, everyone's time is of equal importance.

If it stays this way it should at least be changed so that you get fined according to your current income and then pose a limit as to how high the fine could go.

This I can agree with, but as pointed out earlier, these monster fines are usually reduced when recalculated with current income, so they only appear in headlines.

As far as I know, they can't take away your license for good if you need it for your job. It's ridiculous.

Not true. They have to factor it in, but they will and they do take it away even from full time taxi drivers.