• rus@layer8.space
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    @GBU_28 @TDCN this is basically an income adjusted fine for breaking the law in egregious ways. Are you also opposed to fines for other bad behavior?

    I also appreciate that it gets more people thinking about ways to move without a car. that is more doable in Denmark then in the US, but cars are dangerous, and if you put other at risk so casually I have little sympathy.

    • GBU_28
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      For the sake of conversation, let’s consider some other owned object. I’m grasping here but say you had your computer seized for anti government speech. (I know, not the same as endangering people with a car).

      It wouldn’t be right to lose a multi thousand dollar device simply because the government willed it. Certainly not without compensation.

      • rus@layer8.space
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        @GBU_28 skip any example that doesn’t routinely involve the single biggest cause of child death in the US. There is no reason for a person to be exceeding the speed limit by double. That’s just gambling with others life and limb.

        I think a multi-thousand dollar, income adjusted fine should be the minimum in that case.

        • GBU_28
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The point is I selected an example that had no relation to cars or driving, and no safety context.

          The point of the example was ownership, and dealings with the government.

          Critical thinking 101

          I made clear in earlier comments that I’m aware driving is a privilege and reckless driving is a serious crime

          • rus@layer8.space
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            @GBU_28 the point is significance of the criminal action and the penalty.

            Paying my property taxes late should have a fine (a penalty), but assuming I pay them with in a reasonable time, one that is not significant (say 2% of the taxes amount, or a flat fee of $25)

            The government is taking things of value without recompense because I failed to act with in the law.

            I’ve seen no argument from you that the penalty is not reasonable, or that a reasonable penalty is unjust.

            • rus@layer8.space
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              @GBU_28 additionally, there are many cases where the government seizes the tools used to commit the crime.

              I (off the top of my head) only find issue with this where the confiscated “stuff” is not evidence and taken prior to conviction.

    • TDCN@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It also makes people think twice before lending their car to any random friend