jvr20

Of course the authorities will enforce the law on matters where it takes less effort. And it takes minimal effort to catch people who willingly and obviously flout the law, know they are flouting it, and are counting on being able to afford the penalty.

About the 'greater penalty' thng, yes it's all rather arbitrary, especially w.r.t. road deaths due to careless/reckless driving being, if not ignored, then taken somewhat lightly.

Even with corporate crime such as duty of care over employees, illegal withholding of papers from workers etc, the law is just not enforced. It doesn't usually affect those who can make a difference, so it is ignored.

OTOH, there is also the element of personal responsibility (or parental responsibility in your example of kids in cars). I can well imagine some people being up in arms if the boys in green stopped cars for the driver not looking after his kids properly - "nanny state" they'd all cry!

Of course it's a tragedy should the worst happen - but we have a duty of care to ourselves and those around us that cannot be enforced from outside - witness the mixed reactions w.r.t. Madeline McCann in the early days.

Squabble

When children are concerned it must be enforced from outside in the cases where carers are obviously negligent.

jvr20

that's murky territory. I'm sure the case isn't far off where some American teenager will sue his parents for not getting him the latest PS game citing negligence.

W10

Of course we agree, but its like comparing apples and oranges.

You were CAUGHT 25 times. If someone was CAUGHT by the police 25 times for the offence you mentioned they'd be in a hell of a lot more trouble. They'd have no licence for a start

W10

When you register your car you are supposed to give you actual address

Squabble

Sure, it has the potential to be, especially in litigation happy countries.

But in clear cut cases, there should be intervention.

Basic rights of an individual should be negated in the cases where a child's wellbeing in is obvious jeopardy.

Such as in Australia, there is the reverse onus of proof in cases of child abuse. That is, when a carer is accused of child abuse they must prove their innocence, not the prosecution prove guilt. This is a case where a basic right is negated to preserve the safety of a child, should be enforced more often.

If someone cries "nanny state", tough, as long as the child who can't decide for themselves is safe.

Squabble

W10, that relates to when I mentioned "diligence to enforce", this is just not apparent by the number of people that do it.

Squabble

And I don't think it's an inequitable comparison

Offence = Effort to enforce + Fine

That is, the greater the offence, not only should the fine increase, but also the effort to enforce it.

shakh your bootie

Wow - I think we finally have a poster that might beat Eeyore in a relentless tenacity competition....

seven seas

because I live in Abu Dhabi and don't want to go to Dubai or anywhere Salik?

Emerald_Eyes

I've never heard so much whining and excuses from somebody who is quite clearly in the wrong due to sheer laziness and ignorance. Why compare your crime to any another? You got caught, so just pay up, don't do it again and quit moaning. Sorry, had to be said

Squabble

Never said I wasn't wrong, and I think an argument and whining are different, arguments can be constructive. But yours is typical of the frivolous acceptance of the carnage on Dubai’s roads and the lack disquiet that would prompt any action to rectify it.

Emerald_Eyes

Lol you're calling me frivolous when you were quite happy to flout the Salik thinking it was going to be a small fine for being a naughty boy which ended up being 10,000 AED! Who's frivolous now?

The debate is not about the accident rate and risk level on Dubai's roads, it's about your complete stupidity and laziness to actually find out what the cost of your "urge to steal" would be. Your argument is rediculous, as is your ability to do a some research before committing a crime clearly.

Squabble

What's stupid is not being able to distinguish between what costs money and what costs lives.

You just don't get it.

jvr20

oh FFS would you be so het up about the plight of unrestrained kids in 4x4s had it not been for your mega fine?