Car Seizure Law Angers Hispanics

Chicago Tribune | January 16, 2004 | Daniel Gibbard, Ginny Skweres

[tom paine 2]

Waukegan's tough car-seizure law has netted $2 million and improved safety in its first year, city officials say, but some Hispanics complain it disproportionately affects them.

The ordinance allows police to seize the car of a person accused of drunken driving or committing a felony such as selling drugs or prostitution. But it also allows seizure for what some activists say are relatively common offenses such as driving without a license or without insurance.

[CSM]

Should they be able to take your house too? I mean, if you are in jail, you won't need it.......Where do you draw the line on property confiscation (theft)?

[DumpsterDiver]

Los Angeles does this to "suspected" John's as well.

I'd forgotten all about that law. Now, if the LAPD would also impound all of the abandoned mattresses I see around my neighborhood...

[Stu Cohen]

Driving without insurance or without a license is a scourge in many parts of the country. Anyone caught doing either should have his car impounded.

There was a recent "estimate" on the local news here in Los Angeles which stated that 40% of all drivers in the city of LA, have no license (and therfore of course, no insurance). This helps explain why my insurance rates are so incredibly high, I suppose ... because I need to add the uninsured rider.

Now, to add confusion to the whole issue, I was driving through the Echo Park neighborhood of LA last week and noticed a small strip-mall storefront advertising in "car insurance - no license necessary". I kid you not. The sign was in Spanish and English.

What kind of insurance company is going to insure someone without a license?

Only in Los Angeles, Mexico. Where the odd merging of two cultures produces some very bizarre outcomes.

[hopespringseternal]

Should they be able to take your house too?

What rock have you been hiding under? Where do you get the idea I approve of any of this?

They already take your house if they make a drug accusation.

[Stu Cohen]

I'd forgotten all about that law. Now, if the LAPD would also impound all of the abandoned mattresses I see around my neighborhood...

Yeah. What is the deal with that anyway?

I've never seen so many abandoned matresses on the sidewalks and sometimes streets, than I did before I moved here.

Don't you love it when you have to walk in the street because the matress is laid directly across the whole sidewalk?

We used to have problems with people tossing beer cans and cigarette buts on the ground back east ... but they toss whole pieces of furniture out the window here.

This place truly is stranger than fiction.

[CSM]

".....seizure should be part of the punishment when convicted."

That is what you said. I am against any property confiscation unless it can be PROVEN that it was acquired by committing criminal acts (theft or profit from crime).

Theft by the government is just as wrong as theft by citizens.

[Stu Cohen]

".....seizure should be part of the punishment when convicted."

I agree. Except perhaps in the case of driving without a license and/or uninsured.

That constitutes a clear and immediate public safety hazard. If the driver doesn't own the car, and the owner has a license, the owner should be able to retrieve it. If the owner has no license, you are basically giving a lethal weapon back to someone who has proven they are willing to use it illegally.

If this sounds somewhat personal, it is.

I was rear-ended at a stoplight. I was stopped, the driver hit me doing 55. Totalled my car, injured me. The driver was an illegal alien, unlicensed, uninsured, and drunk.

I got nothing for the car (only had liability insurance), and nothing for medical costs. Couldn't sue the person. Nobody would take the case. They guy wasn't a citizen and wouldn't be able to be tracked down to pay anyway.

We inquired to the police about his status. He was injured, and released after a few days from the hospital. His totalled car was taken away (which was the extent of his punishment).

That was the last I ever heard from them. No deportation, no charges, no nothing. They just let him go, after I paid for his medical bills (through taxes) and paid for my own (through insurance). His penalty was that he didn't get his trashed car back. My compensation was paying for his treatment. I'm pretty sure he is back on the road now. Who knows who it could be next time. A station wagon full of kids? One of your relatives? Could be anyone.

I think anyone without a license or insurance should have their car taken, sold, and distributed to a fund for people who have been aggrieved by uninsured/unlicensed driver.

[DumpsterDiver]

I've never seen so many abandoned matresses on the sidewalks and sometimes streets, than I did before I moved here.

I'm represented (so to speak) on the city council by Janice Hahn. A local newspaper quoted her as saying that the area in which I reside "looked like the 'S' word." I guess old Janice wouldn't say the word even if she stepped in it. ;^) And there are plenty of "abandoned" fully-loaded Pampers in the area also.

[CSM]

So, because you personally suffered an unfortunate instance we should be all for government theft. I see, so rather than just impose fines that would cause someone to chose to sell their property or to spend time in jail, we should just appoint the government to take it from them.

BTW, you knew the risk of carrying liability insurance only and you made that decision. I am not saying you are at fault, but you did chose the more economical payment with full knowledge of the risk.

In addition, I have to wonder why the police did not place him under arrest while he was in the hospital. They had plenty of opportunity to make an arrest and then they could have punished him.

The reality is that confiscation of private property will not solve these inherent flaws in the system.

Should an unliscenced driver have the car confiscated in all cases? (hint: learning to drive, country roads, etc.)

[familyofman]

Include seizing cars from illegals & then we're getting somewhere. Take their property & send them home.

[jimt]

".....seizure should be part of the punishment when convicted."

In general I would certainly agree. But how do we solve the illegal alien / uninsured driver getting in a wreck and scooting problem? If you get in a wreck, have no license / insurance, and are potentially at fault, I think both you AND your car ought to be impounded. Then seizure should follow conviction.

Letting uninsured illegals drive away after a their-fault wreck is simply robbing the responsible drivers.

[Stu Cohen]

So, because you personally suffered an unfortunate instance we should be all for government theft.

No. But you should get a license to drive and get insurance. If a police officer takes someone's gun who just fired it indiscriminately into the air, is that theft?

I think it is an issue of public safety.

BTW, you knew the risk of carrying liability insurance only and you made that decision.

Yes, I was younger and less wise, and thought it was the law for other people to carry insurance. I thought those laws would be enforced. Consider me wiser now. I currently pay a princely sum for full and inunisured motorist fees, primarily to protect myself from "guest workers". There are more costs to this than meets the eye.

In addition, I have to wonder why the police did not place him under arrest while he was in the hospital. They had plenty of opportunity to make an arrest and then they could have punished him.

that's a damn good question. We've been wondering ever since. They told us he was "three times the legal limit". I beleive he did get a court date, but when we followed up, he apparently didn't show and the case was "no-papered". I later asked what that meant and was candidly told that since he did not have an accurate ID, it would be almost imposible to follow up on the case.

Pretty sweet. Huh?

The reality is that confiscation of private property will not solve these inherent flaws in the system.

If your private property is easily used as a lethal weapon, license it, and insure it ... as is required BY LAW. If you don't want to do that, you shouldn't own it.

Do you advocate we all quit paying insurance, we all stop bothering with licenses, and that we should all be allowed to drive regardless?

Is that your official position on the matter?

Should an unliscenced driver have the car confiscated in all cases? (hint: learning to drive, country roads, etc.)

An unlicensed driver should not have a car in the first place. And yes, they shouldn't drive. If you want to learn on country roads, get a learners permit like the rest of us had to do.

You have to do what? Answer 10 multiple choice questions that a rhesus monkey could answer. If you can't do that, buy a bicycle.

[CSM]

Then pass a law that any party leaving the scene of an accident can be charged accordingly. Then, in the specific cases of illegal's, the state could prove that their property was gained by committing criminal acts. That property should rightfully be confiscated, for benefiting from criminal acts (illegally entered the US).

To blankly state that we should confiscate property upon conviction of a crime isn't a very fair way to change the situation. What about a person that has a car worth $25K vs. the person that drives a $1K POS? They both get the car confiscated for being uninsured. The punishment for person 1 is 25X person two for the same crime? Doesn't make sense to me. All you end up with is zero tolerance enforcement of these laws for both illegals and citizens!

[B4Ranch]

"In addition, I have to wonder why the police did not place him under arrest while he was in the hospital. They had plenty of opportunity to make an arrest and then they could have punished him. "

Motor vehicle case courts do not want to put anyone in jail, They want to fine you and have you pay it on time. Basically, they are nothing more than tax collectors with too much authority.

[CSM]

It is pretty clear that you are black and white regarding this discussion. That is fine, and I am not saying that we are in total disagreement, I just think that if we support confiscation of private property to punish unliscenced or uninsured drivers, then we will end up hurting ourselves with zero tolerance situations and our legal citizens will end up being hurt by this power given to the government.

If we actually enforced current laws and fairly took actions when necessary we would be able to resolve many of the issues we see. In your specific case, the act of entering the country illegally should have warranted his arrest while in the hospital, anyone should be able to prove citizenship or they get arrested. Regardless of the instance that merited attention by authorities. If the state could prove that this individual was not in the country legally, then they should have confiscated all of his property and deported them. Period.

The government isn't doing their job in securing the borders and confiscation of private property is not going to solve this problem. It only leads to our government thinking they have a right to the grand in my suitcase!

---

You said:
If your private property is easily used as a lethal weapon, license it, and insure it ... as is required BY LAW. If you don't want to do that, you shouldn't own it.

---

So, you agree that we should require liscensing of all guns? Even the blackpowder guns that have been handed down from ancestors?

---

You asked:
Do you advocate we all quit paying insurance, we all stop bothering with licenses, and that we should all be allowed to drive regardless?

---

I don't advocate that we all quit paying insurance, but I do advocate that it should be voluntary. If I can afford to carry the risk, then I should be able to not pay another private company to fund my potential lawsuits. If I am an individual that can afford to put a few million aside, why should I be required to pay AAA a couple of grand a year, when they aren't doing anything different?

Many people used to drive all the time without liscenses. They just never thought it necessary to go register themselves with the government. This did happen more regularly in rural areas. I see nothing wrong with this.

---

You inquired:
Is that your official position on the matter?

---

My official position is that I wouldn't think that liscensing and insurance policies will work the same way in every situation in every location.

Where are you from?

[CSM]

"Motor vehicle case courts do not want to put anyone in jail, They want to fine you and have you pay it on time. Basically, they are nothing more than tax collectors with too much authority."

Why is a motor vehicles court involved in determining citizenship? The crime that needed to be enforced is illegal entry into the country. The accident and injury was just a catalyst in finding the criminal.

[Centurion2000]

. But it also allows seizure for what some activists say are relatively common offenses such as driving without a license or without insurance.

Get them and there is no problem. This ain't mexico.

[Happy2BMe]

A FReeper's Guide To Immigration Reform

"What remains to be seen is if this country has the capacity to accommodate, and assimilate, an unending wave of mass immigration ¯ because failure to do so will result in a balkanized, fragmented, strife-torn and dysfunctional America."

Federation for American Immigration Reform - FAIR

~ Take the FReeper Immigration Reform Poll ~

[Protagoras]

We jail people who are accused of crimes?

Bail

[Oberon]

Driving without insurance or without a license is a scourge in many parts of the country. Anyone caught doing either should have his car impounded.

Possibly... after he's had his say in court.