you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 38 points 6 months ago (14 children)

This highlights some pretty lax road traffic law tbh.

Not being able to suspend a licence because they were caught on a camera is fucking moronic.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    After over 500 times it seems more appropriate to revoke and never allow reapplication

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Here, after that many proven violations, the car itself would've been impounded.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    This would seem to be the better route. Unless the owner has reported the vehicle stolen, they certainly know who is driving it and should still be responsible for letting the other person drive. Sorry, snitch them out if you don’t like thousands in fines. Deliberately using “you can’t prove it was me” while racking up fines with the expectation of getting away with it has to have some limits.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    The cameras in north america typically aim at the plates and not the driver themselves, so there is plausible deniability for who was driving making the lisence difficult to suspend. That said, there is no good reason they can't suspend the registration or impound the vehicle itself regardless of who was driving.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Your friend can be driving the vehicle, they know the vehicle sped, but not who was actually driving. So demerits aren’t issued.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago* (7 children)

    Where I am the owner of the vehicle can either reveal the true identity of the driver or they will cop the demerit points them selves.

    The demerits will always be issued. *there is a loop hole for company vehicles where by the company can pay double the fine, but may also be subject to 5k fine if they don't take reasonable steps to ID the driver.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (6 children)

    That doesn’t sound like a very friendly system, that’s against basic rights. You shouldn’t be faulted for someone else’s actions.

    It’s up to you to get the money from your friend, that’s risky enough to let them drive. If you’re gonna be responsible anyways, there’s literally no point in letting someone else drive your vehicle.

    That’s not a system we should be promoting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (5 children)

    Your vehicle = your responsibility.

    I don't see the issue.

    People still game the system to some extent, by making an agreement with mates to take demerits for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (4 children)

    Yes, hence why the fine goes against the vehicle. You didn’t commit a moving violation, so to be giving demerits for something you didn’t do is a slap to your rights lol.

    And your bottom comment is exactly why the system shouldn’t exist…

    What country is this anyway? I’m gonna avoid going there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    If the penalty is only monetary, then for the wealthy they just become minor inconveniences.

    I would prefer not to be the victim of vehicular murder when I am walking across an intersection because some rich arsehole is late for the polo and a several thousand dollar fine is meaningless to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    You JUST said they can pay someone to take their demerits dude… the system doesn’t work, it provides the loophole for that guy to continue doing it regardless.

    Now the government is complicit. And you would be locking up and taking rights away from innocent people too. Great system.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    How is the government complicit?

    No system is perfect.

    As far as I'm aware there isn't a massive problem with people having others take demerits for them. It's more like the occasional thing someone might do to help a friend who is on their limit.

    12 demerits and you lose your licence. No one can be consistently taking other's money on exchange for demerits. You would lose your licence very fast.

    Anyway, it's only for automatic cameras. (Like speeding and red lights etc)

    No faking who you are if caught by a traffic cop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    As far as I'm aware there isn't a massive problem with people having others take demerits for them. It's more like the occasional thing someone might do to help a friend who is on their limit.

    I’d take 25k to take 3 demerits (I’m sure you can find a couple dozen patsies to rotate as needed easily) that are gone after a few years, there’s gonna be plenty of people willing to do it, there’s also courses to take that reduce demerits too. You’re admitting it’s possible, it happens, but refusing to acknowledge that it can be problem. You say you’re worried about people just paying fines, your system is no better and objectively worse, but you’re eating the bullshit dude.

    Your government is complicit, because they made rules allowing this to happen… and they profit lol. There’s a reason why your country is probably the only one like this. What country has these crappy rules?

  • source
  • parent