I do not understand. I was speaking of completely innocent people losing property to government. What are you speaking of?
I expected this reply. I almost predicted it but gave you a chance to be explicit about your claims you proudly pay taxes. Those whom suffer the least brag on how much they pay. I add you to the extremely long list of Democrats that refuse to come up with a correct reply. Why would you call it a tax burden given how proud you are?
LOL,I make sense using your ludicrous premise... Either we are the victims of circumstances, we create through our choices, or there are real victims who, through no fault of their own, suffer from the unpredictable and criminal / predatory acts of others.
We are not paupers, and declare all our income and assets. We have never hidden anything. We literally cannot pay more than we already do. I have no idea what you mean by 'suffering the least'.
Do you enjoy declaring all of your assets to government? What you told me is your so called burden is very minimal. When one pays pennies and the rich pay millions, naturally those pennies do not matter much. Those who pay little, suffer the least. But do more checking. I do not think government has yet demanded you expose to them your entire bounty of assets.
I live in Arizona and we impound drunk drivers cars all the time. Impounding a car in a crime is no different than impounding a gun in a crime.
Getting hurt from bad choices is normal and personal; getting arrested and your property confiscated by a police state is not.
No, different impounding. With a DUI you get your car back after paying for the towing and storage. Same with a gun used in a crime except it can be held as evidence if necessary, and might or might not be returned depending on the result of the criminal's trial. In the forfeiture law, the car is just confiscated, period, and sold for cash that the authorities keep if they want, yet the owner of the car may not have been within a thousand miles of the suspected crime.
That is my point. But what you seem to not know is that AZ handed the car back to the parents. A lot of stink may have been why.
there is a big deference between impounding and forfeiture of your car and never getting it back though impounding can be a pain too, my motorcycle was stolen when younger, the police kept it as evidence for the trial even though they caught the guy the next day, took me forever to get that back
Nope, wrong ! If a Drunk driver is driving a Rental car, and it gets pounded, it will have to be returned to the car Rental agency. It is covered in various laws such as unauthorized use of a vehicle and theft of a vehicle, because no sane person lends a vehicle to an inebriated person, reasonable man act etc.. The vehicles owner is not responsible for unauthorized acts committed with said vehicle.
Also, if your car is stolen, make the criminal pay those costs related to the theft, towing, storage, Court costs etc, take it out of their prison pay or other assets. Why make the victim pay ? Liberals LOVE to make the victims pay for the crimes committed against them rather than make the criminals responsible for their crimes.
But why on earth would you be arrested and have property confiscated if you'd never had any contact (whatsoever) with criminals or criminal activity?
You are pretty inexperienced ? Yes ? Or you pretend well. A person I knew, had a flock of Estupid freinds, and after work, he picked them up, he was an Armed Security guard and was in line to go to the next Police Academy, so they say, drive us to the 7-11 to get whatever, he did so, they get back in the car and he drives home. As they are sitting there drinking beer and eating snick snax, the POLICE smash in and arrest the lot. Long story short, my freind was convinced even though he was completely innocent, to plead Guilty for a lesser sentence, as between the ADA and advice of his Attourney that his chances in Court were zilch, and to take the conviction and his entire life was wrecked, then he turned to a life of crime.
Can you or anyone say they have never had any contact with criminals or criminal activity??? ANS: not in the least.
He was free to say no at any time prior to the event. You can't possibly blame police for his poor choices, surely?
No, but not a single person currently known to me (which is many ... of all ages up to and including 95) has ever been on the wrong side of the law, or even under suspicion via association. It's VERY easy to stay clean for life.
well, you are the first person in the history of mankind that was not acquainted with a single person who had ever been on the wrong side of the law. Way to go!
You mean you know of no one who's ever gotten a speeding or parking ticket? You do walk a straight line.