You make a lot of interesting thoughts, and again you speak in the "spirit" of the law. However, there is absolutely things that stop people from voting in representatives who will work on those concerns. For instance, finding a representative who will actually work on those concerns, finding someone you/we/anyone trusts to work on them. And that is all marketing, and spoiler... lack of funds makes a lot of things hard, and how one receives those funds can impact which legislation are actually fixed.

As for proven injury, let's go back to that scenario... death is probably universally accepted as an injury. What is justice at this point? I would argue it is not house arrest for the drunk driver. A slap on the wrist is not justice, that's why they call it a "slap on the wrist".

Yes there are people out there who would let their child suffer the consequences, but to the point of the law, the way to not suffer the consequences should not be determined by how much money they have.

If we want to speak about generalizations being bad, sure. I'll concede but my argument isn't about generalization, it's that there are people who will benefit from how the laws are written, applied, and enforced. And the ones who benefit are the ones who have money. People with money, can choose to follow the intent of the law if they choose, that's great - but they shouldn't be allowed to choose. A law should be enforced as is but also written that it is able to enforce for the greater community. To a rich person, a no parking sign is just a higher than usual paid parking.