paganinpurple:

gehayi:

nonsense-choir:

gnotknormal:

theconcealedweapon:

An action being “punishable by a fine” basically means “legal for rich people”.

Oh wow. That’s…

This is why all fines should be income based. They should carry the EXACT same weight of punishment to anyone who commits the act. That way poor folk aren’t bankrupted into desperation or jail by a minor offense and rich people can’t get away with shit.

Like they do in, for example, Finland.

Finland, Home of the $103,000 Speeding Ticket

Reima Kuisla, a Finnish businessman, was recently caught going 65 miles per hour in a 50 zone in his home country—an offense that would typically come with a fine of a couple hundred dollars, at most, in the U.S. But after Finnish police pulled Kuisla over, they pinged a federal taxpayer database to determine his income, consulted their handbook, and arrived at the amount that he was required to pay: €54,000.

The fine was so extreme because in Finland, some traffic fines, as well as fines for shoplifting and violating securities-exchange laws, are assessed based on earnings—and Kuisla’s declared income was €6.5 million per year. Exorbitant fines like this are infrequent, but not unheard of: In 2002, a Nokia executive was fined the equivalent of $103,000 for going 45 in a 30 zone on his motorcycle, and the NHL player Teemu Selanne incurred a $39,000 fine two years earlier.

“This is no constitutionally governed state,” one Finn who was fined nearly $50,000 moaned to The Wall Street Journal, “This is a land of rhinos!” Outrage among the rich—especially nonsensical, safari-invoking outrage—might be a sign that something fair is at work.

This is than perfect way to produce fines which are fair to all

chickendoghub:

(after love after love after love)

i can feel something inside me saying