12 ms·
This seems like backdoor civil asset forfeiture but it would allow them to take assets that aren't even present and/or involved at the time of the "offense". C
by caseysoftware 9y ago
This seems like backdoor civil asset forfeiture but it would allow them to take assets that aren't even present and/or involved at the time of the "offense".
Can you see a particularly cash-strapped town telling officers to skip the Toyota Camrys and instead pull over the BMWs? It seems ideal for abuse, selective law enforcement, and likely other bad behaviors.
Oddly enough, this would likely go away with self-driving cars as high income people switch to vehicles who "can't" break the law.
- dopkew 9y agoIt will put strong pressure to align the law with implementation. If the implementation treads into injustice, it (the law) is explicitly designed to be against those who can shrug it off, rather than drown.
- cheriot 9y agoThere's a big gap between a "day fine" and taking someone's house because their kid stashed some drugs in the closet. One is proportional and happens on conviction while the other can be nuts.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- oblio 9y agoAre you really worried that _rich people_ are the ones that can’t protect themselves from abuse? :)
- garmaine 9y agoRich and powerful are not the same thing.
- oblio 9y agoEven so, rich people have a lot bigger chances to protect themselves from abuse, than poor people. And secondly, what use is a punishment that is not punishment at all for rich people?
- edanm 9y agoNot as much as poor people, sure, but keep in mind that even rich people are much less powerful than governments or even large amounts of people. I mean, obviously a completely different scenario, but, how many times have revolutions killed all the rich/powerful people? They don't have infinite protection just cause they're rich.
- oblio 9y agoI'm from a country where that happened, I'm quite aware about this aspect. Even so, fining rich people more just makes sense, to me. Fines are supposed to be a deterrent. If we're reaching the point where we're discussing about revolutions and civil forfeiture, I think there's a bigger problem here. And it's not proportional fines.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- RestlessMind 9y ago> Can you see a particularly cash-strapped town telling officers to skip the Toyota Camrys and instead pull over the BMWs? No I see a world where neither Toyotas nor BMWs are speeding. But if both are speeding, then owners of both should feel equal amount of pain. And equal amount of pain won't come from equal amount absolute fines (300$ is a drop in the bucket for a billionaire, significant for a poor person).