Rich Norwegian Fined $109,000 For Drunk Driving

2009-05-12 18:19:42

#1

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5887

A rich Norwegian has been ordered to pay a 700,000 kroner ($109,000) fine after driving his car 400 yards while drunk. Police stopped the 49-year-old man in October near the airport for southern Norway's Kristiansand. Tests showed he had a blood alcohol content of .188 percent. Norway's maximum is .02 percent.

The man pleaded guilty in court on Tuesday.

Norwegian courts set drunken driving fines based on income and personal wealth. Tuesday's ruling said the man's income is 751,769 kroner ($117,000) and personal wealth is 228 million kroner ($36.6 million).

It also revoked his license for two years and three months.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/1 … 02561.html

So what I really what to get out this discussion is : Should fines amounts be based on amount of income?

No; everyone is on the same level
Yes; The poor wouldn't be unfairly fined and the rich would actually take the law a bit more seriously.

Personally I like cheese. /Harmor

2009-05-12 18:44:31

#2

BN: smells like wee wee; +159|7069

No, everyone pays the same a across the board.

2009-05-12 18:51:50

#3

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6748|Chicago, IL

no, no discrimination based on race, age, or class

Norway's just looking for a quick buck

2009-05-12 18:52:06

#4

Doctor Strangelove: Real Battlefield Veterinarian.; +1,758|6769

BN wrote:
No, everyone pays the same a across the board.

Yeah but then rich people will get away with doing shit more often because the fine isn't as big a problem for them. Where as a poor person's life could be seriously fucked because of a fine.

2009-05-12 18:57:06

#5

Locoloki: I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!; +216|6941|Your moms bedroom

so an unemployed person is allowed to drive drunk? fuck that

2009-05-12 19:13:28

#6

Narupug: Fodder Mostly; +150|5898|Vacationland

Locoloki wrote:
so an unemployed person is allowed to drive drunk? fuck that

naw they just don't get any unemployment for a couple months

2009-05-12 19:15:07

#7

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5887

Narupug wrote:
Locoloki wrote:
so an unemployed person is allowed to drive drunk? fuck that
naw they just don't get any unemployment for a couple months

They would also get the rest of the punishment that goes along with drunk driving. Seriously

2009-05-12 19:19:01

#8

Narupug: Fodder Mostly; +150|5898|Vacationland

Macbeth wrote:
Narupug wrote:
Locoloki wrote:
so an unemployed person is allowed to drive drunk? fuck that
naw they just don't get any unemployment for a couple months
They would also get the rest of the punishment that goes along with drunk driving. Seriously

The point is it depends, if they got layed off from a six figure job is different from being layed off from Walmart

2009-05-12 23:32:15

#9

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6976|Canberra, AUS

Holy shit! A hundred grand?

Of course not.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2009-05-13 00:08:41

#10

B-Scimitar: Defeating your warriors.; +116|6710|Espoo, Finland

Reminded me about this:

A Finnish millionaire Jari Bär, the former owner of the Iisalmi’s company Finnritilä was handed a fine of 111,888 euros (141,661 dollars) for doing 82 km/h (51 mph) in a 60 km/h (37 mph) zone on January in Siilijärvi, Finland.

According to Savon Sanomat if the speed had been 80 km/h the fine would have been only 115 Euros.

IMO fines should be based on income but there should also be some sort of limit. These $100k fines are just ridiculous.

Edit: Source

Last edited by B-Scimitar (2009-05-13 00:09:32)

2009-05-13 00:10:42

#11

mtb0minime: minimember; +2,418|6956

I vote no.

Instead consider the consequences when he loses his license. Then it might impact him more than say, a poor person without a job (or a decent one).

2009-05-13 00:46:12

#12

The A W S M F O X: I Won't Deny It; +172|5985|SQUID

Same for everyone, otherwise it's not justice.

2009-05-13 01:04:57

#13

KuSTaV: noice; +947|6812|Gold Coast

Nope.

You'll then get people who have no money doing dangerous shit and endangering others lives. Makes no sense to do it tbh.

I see your point, but the consequences of lower classes getting fined less is shitty.

noice

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/26774/awsmsanta.png

2009-05-13 01:08:06

#14

mtb0minime: minimember; +2,418|6956

Actually, lower class should get fined more since they have less to lose, which means more reason to act irresponsibly.

2009-05-13 03:51:36

#15

herrr_smity: Member; +156|6929|space command ur anus

Yes

2009-05-13 03:59:37

#16

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6712|'Murka

The only equitable way to do a variable fine rate based on income would be to make the fine a certain percentage of monthly income (or yearly).

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2009-05-13 04:45:57

#17

Hakei: Banned; +295|6296

I think it was the ancient Indians almost 1000(?) years ago decided that patients undertaking a cataract operation were actually allowed to pay a percentage of what they earned, so a poor person would get it basically free and a rich man would have to pay much more.

2009-05-13 04:55:14

#18

Harmor: Error_Name_Not_Found; +605|6849|San Diego, CA, USA

Locoloki wrote:
so an unemployed person is allowed to drive drunk? fuck that

Good point. I'm sure there's a floor, but yeah. Perhaps Rich people will outsource their crimes to poor people then?

2009-05-13 05:32:44

#19

Bull3t: stephen brule; +83|6603

Rich Norwegian Fined $109,000 For Drunk Driving by Macbeth

Sorry couldn't resist haha

Yeah it should be based on their income.

2009-05-13 05:49:47

#20

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,817|6407|eXtreme to the maX

No.
It would be impossible to create a fair system, and why should someone be penalised for getting ahead?

Fuck Israel

2009-05-13 05:51:09

#21

DonFck: Hibernator; +3,227|6933|Finland

Dilbert_X wrote:
No.
It would be impossible to create a fair system, and why should someone be penalised for getting ahead?

Penalised for breaking the law, you mean?

Yes, I believe a progressive fining system is in order, in moderation.

I need around tree fiddy.

2009-05-13 05:53:23

#22

DUnlimited: got any popo lolo intersting?; +1,160|6764|cuntshitlake

Yes. It is not equal if a man with 5k /year income and another with 500k income / year get fined the same, is it.

Those 100k fines are ridiculous though. Some moderation could be of course applied.

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg

2009-05-13 05:56:48

#23

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,817|6407|eXtreme to the maX

DonFck wrote:
Penalised for breaking the law, you mean?

Penalised for earning more.
I don't really think fines make sense, except for trivial offences.
Community service, probation, prison etc are fairer, OTOH someone with a job is affected much worse by jail time than someone unemployed - so it swings both ways.

Fuck Israel

2009-05-13 06:02:53

#24

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6882|SE London

S.Lythberg wrote:
no, no discrimination based on race, age, or class

Norway's just looking for a quick buck

How is this related to any of those things?

It's not related to race. It's not related to age. It's not related to class.

It's related to income - which is not the same.

I can see the merits of both arguments with this. Either system (fixed or proportional fines) is fairly sound.

2009-05-13 07:45:49

#25

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6982|Disaster Free Zone

A good example where they should apply are parking tickets.

Yes	47%	47% - 22
No	52%	52% - 24
Total: 46

BF2S Forums Rich Norwegian Fined $109,000 For Drunk Driving

Poll

BN wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

Narupug wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Narupug wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

DonFck wrote:

S.Lythberg wrote:

Board footer