I think there is merit in apportioning a fine based on one’s ability to pay and in keeping with the principle of deterring a repeat offense. The idea is the punishment should be comensurate both with the nature of the offense and the offender’s circumstances.
Its not wealth redistribution. People pay what they owe no more and no less. That’s not favoritism. You don’t want to let people off the hook but treat them as befits their station in life.
Its not fair to treat Zuckerberg and a janitor the same when a fine is due because a flat fine affects them very differently. How much should each offender owe? That’s for society to determine.
Does the wealthy offender still have the right to be secure in his possessions and papers over a traffic violation, or does the government have a right to see the wealthy offender's bank statements and tax returns in order to assess the fine for simply speeding or running a red light?
Will traffic court judges now be summarily issuing fourth amendment warrants to see bank and tax records just because somebody got a ticket, so they can assess the potential fine even before the person shows up in court to contest it or pay it?
-PJ