system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: a fine of $50-500 for accidentally killing pedestrians, and cyclists isn't enough of a penalty

For some reason, the typical penalty for accidentally killing pedestrians, and cyclists is on the order of $250 to $500 with penalties sometimes being as low as $50, and as high as several years in prison.

It doesn't seem to matter if drugs, or alcohol were involved, or if the driver was known to be texting at the time - the penalty seems to always come down to between $250, and $500 in Toronto, Vancouver, NYC, and other cities in North America.

As long as you stay at the scene of a fatal accident, and are pleasant, there seems to be a good chance that you'll walk away with nothing more than a verbal warning. Of course, being intoxicated will potentially lead to drunk driving charges, but, other than that - who knows?

Earlier this year, in Vancouver, a cyclist was killed after being doored by a driver - the driver received a fine of $81 since the offence that they'd committed was unsafely opening a car door under the Motor Vehicle Act.

In 2017, in Toronto, a 70 year old man was riding his bike when he was suddenly cut off by a driver who turned right directly in front of his path, leading to the cyclist being knocked off of his bike. He died of a traumatic brain injury 2 days later, and the driver was fined $500 - the maximum allowed penalty allowed under the Highway Traffic Act for an unsafe turn.

In 2017, in Toronto, a woman was standing on the sidewalk, and was fatally struck by the driver of a van that mounted the sidewalk - the driver received a fine of $1000, and six months of probation with a few driving restrictions attached. The lawyer who litigated the case noted that of the previous cases he'd litigated, drivers were convicted of careless driving, or a lesser charge, and fined $700, $600, and $85, respectively.

So, Reddit, change my view - is a small fine enough of a penalty?

Of the several hit and runs I've been involved in, nothing's happened to the *presumably drunk* drivers - however, to be fair, my bike has never been severely damaged, and I didn't die in any of those collisions - so, no harm no foul.
gpt
Results-oriented based punishment rather than intend-oriented has no benefit in reducing harm; it has no deterrent benefit since punishing higher based on situations outside of the culprit's control can't rationally deter them; as they no control over whether it will happen by definition so from their perspective from a matter of strategy it's random. In terms of rehabilitation it also adds nothing, and one might even argue that from a perspective of retribution it's unfair to punish some more than others though they did the same thing because the consequences were worse due to circumstances outside of their control.