The question was why someone would pay more than the fine, and in fact risk paying far more than the fine.
To deny access to due process, most places add on very high court costs if you don't win outright.
You may risk paying $800 to fight a $40 ticket.
Most traffic courts have nothing to do with safety or justice.
Anyone that thinks fines have any relationship to justice should examine countires with fines based on income.
Many traffic penalties are part of the disenfranchisement conspiracy in full swing across the country now.
Regressive revenue coillection has always been the goal though.http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/public/wsj_finland.htmlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/ ... based.htmlhttp://articles.sfgate.com/2010-01-11/n ... e-ministry
Regressive fines have been so successful that some cities have had to have amnesties, due to so many people being effectively outlawed that the system begins to break down as more and more people refuse to act as witnesses, report crimes, traffic accidents, and so on.
Once they give up, they stop paying all fines too.
This is the primary motivation for cities.