Which makes a lot of sense. How is it fair that a speeding ticket costs the same for everyone? For the lower-class, a speeding ticket can mean not being able to afford food for the month. For the upper-class, a speeding ticket can been seen as just the price for driving faster than usual. Laws are supposed to treat us equally, but without considering the income of the one who gets fined, the law is really unfavorable to some while at most a nuisance for others.
It depends on what you think the purpose of these laws is. If you think they're supposed to be deterrents, then you're absolutely right. It's not a deterrent for rich people.
The other point of view is that by speeding, you are doing a certain amount of damage to society. Speeding does kill people, so you can spread the cost to society across all speeders. Government agencies regularly put values on human lives (usually around $10 million right now), so it becomes a simple number of people killed * $10 million / number of speeders / rate of speeders being caught. This damage being done, however, is the same no matter how much money you make.
There's a long tradition of seeing the punishment for a crime as making society whole after you've done damage to it (hence the phrase "paying your debt to society" being used to refer to a prison sentence).
> How is it fair that a speeding ticket costs the same for everyone?
It isn’t. Why should I pay the same fines while driving my lamborghini with fresh brakes and tires as the poor people speeding in their deathboxes? My car probably has half the braking distance of theirs.
You shouldn't get an advantage on breaking the rules just because you were doing it in a way that is safer. Break rule, get consequence.
Besides, others on the road don't care about how good your brakes are. They just care about what to expect and someone speeding by is not what they expect. And its not like the brakes are gonna help you much if you make a mistake. If anything the extra feeling of safety is gonna make you drive more riskily.
