[net.legal] Making the punishment fit the crime

minow@decvax.UUCP (Martin Minow) (01/08/85)

Some years back I remember reading that the police responsible
for the Lincoln tunnel (between New Jersey and New York City)
have a simple solution for drivers who disobey the "alternate
merge" signs -- they stop the car and give the driver a ticket
45 minutes later.

Martin Minow
decvax!minow

geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) (01/12/85)

In article <20@decvax.UUCP> minow@decvax.UUCP (Martin Minow) writes:

>Some years back I remember reading that the police responsible
>for the Lincoln tunnel (between New Jersey and New York City)
>have a simple solution for drivers who disobey the "alternate
>merge" signs -- they stop the car and give the driver a ticket
>45 minutes later.

And this, too, is vigilante justice.  The trouble, like with all vigilante
justice, is that there is no review mechanism.  The police are taking all
three branches of government into their own hands, and the offending motorist
has no option to get the decision reviewed, nor any way to get the practice
stopped.  What if the motorist has been late twice this week, is in danger of
being fired, and is running late again because their kid dropped a gallon of
milk on the floor just before it was time to leave?  Is it really fair to
them to cost them their job over a minor traffic violation?  (Please don't
tell me they shouldn't have been late the first two times unless you are a
single parent).

This is not to say I am against the idea of using deliberate delaying tactics
to punish a person who tries to crowd ahead in traffic.  But the punishment
should be selected after a legislative debate has given all sides a chance to
air the issue, and should only be applied after the motorist has had a chance
to defend himself.  The NYC cops, while admirably creative, were denying due
process to a whole bunch of people.
-- 

	Geoff Kuenning
	...!ihnp4!trwrb!desint!geoff