Posted on 11/12/2008 8:43:59 AM PST by NormsRevenge
It’s not that easy.
Let’s say you make it a $500 fine for selling weed. You go to bust a guy and he decided to flee in a car. He blows through a few stoplights and almost kills a few people. He gets to court and immediately, they drop the evading charge. Let’s say he then refuses to pay the fine. You are atill putting him in the can for a non-violent crime.
Yes, you are still putting him in jail, precisely because he engaged in a dangerous and reckless action. It is noteworthy how few drug offenders are in jail solely for just drugs.
It would, clearly, make California a “debtor’s prison”, but California has already taken the first step in that direction, by offering “paid” jail cells that are more like a motel room, but only for those who can afford them.
That vast majority of serious crimes are committed by the poor, as well, but this is designed at the middle class and wealthy citizens who, while still punished for their minor offenses, are paying major fines to reimburse the public for their actions.
The logic is why should the public have to pay for their offense, and also pay for their punishment? Instead their money goes for the public benefit.
Ask the typical citizen which they would prefer: having their taxes go through the roof and their services cut back; or to dock some rich kid $30,000 who got busted for DUI that didn’t hurt anyone?
Of course, if the rich kid made a habit of it, they would still have to go to jail. But for the first offense, there are not a lot of people out there who aren’t going to feel a sting from losing $30. Middle class parents would likely take it out of their kids’ hide.
I don’t know about CA but DUI is not a jailable offense in most states. You have to be a repeat offender to get jail time.
ex-—republic. We are now a socilist democracy. Very short life span.
Remember that there are direct penalties and indirect penalties. Having a DUI on your record will drive up the cost of insurance for the rest of your life, often costs offenders their job, which in turn costs them their home or apartment.
That is why, for only first time offenders who have not caused an accident or harmed anyone, a $30,000 non-judicial fine might be worth it to them. For the vast majority, it would sting like heck, but they would pay it instead of the alternative.
They would not have their insurance rates increased, and would keep their job and their home. If it wasn’t worth it to them, they could go the traditional route. But their lawyer, if they had one, would advise them to pay the money.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.