Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a rare case I support civil asset forfeiture: sue the car (in addition to criminal proceedings). Impound the car until fines are paid - which go into uninsured motorist funds - or else sell the car at auction and do the same. Will other parties' vehicles get impounded? Yes and that sucks. But either don't lend them your car, or else let the people closest to the offender pay the consequences more often than the current situation where random people in traffic pay financially or with life and limb for reckless drivers.


I hope you don't wonder why civil asset forfeiture persists.

It's like you're laying one brick on the road to hell. Multiply by everyone else and their pet issues and the whole damn thing gets paved.

What even is the point of principals if you don't stand by them?


What other "pet issue" kills 40k people a year and injures 50-100x of that?

It's a huge issue which warrants radical steps.


> Multiply by everyone else and their pet issues and the whole damn thing gets paved.

Slippery slope fallacy. Why don't you refute the central point of what I suggested?


You don't have to have civil asset forfeiture to impound the car.


then call it something euphemistic with many more words, but "suing the car" is ultimately what it would entail.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: