fighting a speeding ticket.
#76
Originally Posted by SmokeyBear
DUDE, you've gone back to aguing MY point, TAXES do pay for those things. Revenue from tickes do not. If you don't want to pay taxes and speed as much as you want, buy yourself an island and drive as fast as you want.
Besides the best way to keep from paying that Ticket Tax is not to do something that gets you ticketed in the first place. You won't pay a dime that way.
Besides the best way to keep from paying that Ticket Tax is not to do something that gets you ticketed in the first place. You won't pay a dime that way.
#77
#78
Originally Posted by Shinesintx
It does not matter WHERE the money goes. My complaint is that it is GENERATED revenue when cops should be preventing and solving murderers, lowering all sorts of crime, ect. INSTEAD, a percentage are out GENERATING revenue for the STATE...
Personally I think fix it tickets for safety equipment are fine, for normal stuff like lights and the like. There are a bunch of one eyed cars running around here, and seeing them with one or two brakelights can be exciting too.
#80
Originally Posted by Shinesintx
sorry I gave facts..but the budget was not in question...2.3 billion was GENERATED revenue from ticketing. Crap, I did it again. Me stating facts again. If I gave you 10 thousand dollars, you'd crap your pants because you thought that it was alot of money. If I gave you a dollar, you'd think whatever...When I quote facts about 2.3 billion being generated in revenue, you reply by saying:
I dont get your logic...IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW FAR 2.3 BILLION GOES! It is generated, and its a buttload of money to create with our TAXES being used to generate it...
I dont get your logic...IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW FAR 2.3 BILLION GOES! It is generated, and its a buttload of money to create with our TAXES being used to generate it...
And no it would take more than 10K to make me crap my pants, sorry.
Last edited by Norm; 11-14-2007 at 02:49 PM.
#81
There is something called "The Broken Windows" model of policing. The whole idea of the model is officer concentrate on minor issues. The end result is a lowered crime rate. Even if the minor issue is traffic enforcement, the officer sitting on the side of the road with their lights on says to people driving by the officer's are present. If you see a lot of officer's with traffic stops the next thought is there sure are a lot of officer's in this area. I know that thought does not ever occur to you, and as soon as you pass the traffic stop you speed up, even if you never slowed down to begin with, but with average people the thought does occur to them.
Yes traffic enforcement results in revenue to the jurisdiction. However some states require no money raised by law enforcement activities can be used by the agency. Others limit how much the agency receives. Yes 2.3 billion is a lot of money. It is also a lot of people not obeying the law. In Florida the revenue going to the agencies for traffic enforcement does not pay for the officer to perform the task so it might seem like a money maker traffic in that state is a money loser. Consider the money spent in fines for not obeying the laws of the road a mis-use fee, similar to losing your security deposit for damaging the last apartment you lived in.
Yes traffic enforcement results in revenue to the jurisdiction. However some states require no money raised by law enforcement activities can be used by the agency. Others limit how much the agency receives. Yes 2.3 billion is a lot of money. It is also a lot of people not obeying the law. In Florida the revenue going to the agencies for traffic enforcement does not pay for the officer to perform the task so it might seem like a money maker traffic in that state is a money loser. Consider the money spent in fines for not obeying the laws of the road a mis-use fee, similar to losing your security deposit for damaging the last apartment you lived in.
#82