LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
  • Cher
    +1
    @drunkenninja -

    I think they could have dealt more personally and directly with him. I don't like the negative publicity. It seems a bit harsh. Do you think he blatantly ignored the rules? My thoughts are that he wasn't trying to hide the dogs. The fine seems automatic. Is there a set fine?

  • drunkenninja
    +2
    @Cher -

    The problem is that even a stiff fine of the maximum amount (roughly 200k) might not be deterrent enough for the mega wealthy, and were talking about a serious issue here if people think they can disregard such policy due to it being a slap on the wrist in the unlikely off chance they get caught. A good way to put this in perspective is to imagine some rich billionaire gets pulled over for doing 220 km/s in a 60 zone... do you think a fine of 350 dollars would be sufficient deterrent for them not to do it again? Anyway, I think the media is also responsible for blowing this into the public news feed - but then again hes a celebrity so I doubt anyone can keep a lid on this for long.

  • Cher
    +3
    @drunkenninja -

    I guess I'm an optimist and a kind one. I just don't think he was being blatantly defiant. It's doubtful he wanted all this trouble. Of course you are politically correct. There is no argument about the facts. For some reason it just hit a nerve.

  • drunkenninja
    +1
    @Cher -

    And you should be, the world needs more optimists! :)

    • Cher
      +3
      @drunkenninja -

      That's sweet! Thank you~ appreciative of your interaction and honest comments!