charlotte drivers beware

[mavster 10+ year member]

Then make that a larger fine/more jail time. Dont take peoples property. We arent china, or Russia.

And I agree with you, they should do that to dui drivers too...

impound the car, and turn it into scrap metal...we need more metal right?

 

[PollyCranopolis 10+ year member]

Because you are putting everyone elses lives at risk. You don't have that right or privledge.

On the open road at 2am, the only life your putting at risk is your own. You wanna revoke my license, throw me in jail, fine. Take my 30k car, and I'll have your balls in a sling.

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

So consider it a $40k fine...and the DA's office will not take any less....

So whats next? speeding? Illegally parking? Where does it stop? When do YOU, personally start giving a shit? Because one thing the gov't doesnt do, is stop. So this wont be the last of this law, thats for sure.

 

[lilmaniac2 5,000+ posts]

What makes you think that all of that didn't happen first, in this storyline?
The article is written with an embellished angle designed to get people to pop like you are right now. There is no where near enough information in that article to make logical conclusions about anything.

Your my hero

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

On the open road at 2am, the only life your putting at risk is your own. You wanna revoke my license, throw me in jail, fine. Take my 30k car, and I'll have your balls in a sling.

Exactly, i just think this is too extreme. There are plenty of other ways to stop street racing then to take peoples cars.

One question for anyone that lives in Charlotte. Do they have a racetrack that is advertised to the public that people can go to to race? They have one down here, where you can go and bet/race as much as you would like. And they started busting down rankin every night, and honestly, there is a noticeable decrease in racing. Imagine that? And we didnt have to take anyones car to do it. Fcking amazing.

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

What makes you think that all of that didn't happen first, in this storyline?
The article is written with an embellished angle designed to get people to pop like you are right now. There is no where near enough information in that article to make logical conclusions about anything.

Well you guys are assuming that this law only applies to certain things, im simply assuming that it doesnt.

 

[mavster 10+ year member]

There are several tracks here in NY...and street racing continues to exists....

imagine that...i know most NYers are complete idiots...

but your concept doesn't always work...sometimes some tough love is needed...

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

There are several tracks here in NY...and street racing continues to exists....
imagine that...i know most NYers are complete idiots...

but your concept doesn't always work...sometimes some tough love is needed...

**** yankees.

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

Uh do0d, they can already take your car for parking illegally. You're kinda mixed up on this topic huh.


What do you mean certain things? Because I don't believe I am.

I see the same thing happening here that happens to DUI offenders.

They can tow it, yes. But take it? Dont think so, but maybe your laws up north are different, its definantly possible. Now if you leave your car impounded over...30 days? Then yes, you are correct.

People are assuming this only applies to non street legal cars, or with modifications, but i dont see that in the article anywhere.

And i have also not seen a DUI offender have their car taken. Breathilizers in the car, yes, suspended license, yes. But taking their car? No. Only thing ive seen property seized for is if they can prove that the way you paid for the car was illegal, like selling drugs with no job, etc. But again, laws are different.

 

[PollyCranopolis 10+ year member]

Every case is different depending on the circumstance. Judges take circumstance into consideration during rulings. Thats why we don't have robot judges. Also, if you think about it, seatbelt laws are unconstitutional (though I always wear mine). The government has no right to force you to protect yourself, when not an issue of public safety.

 

[mavster 10+ year member]

Every case is different depending on the circumstance. Judges take circumstance into consideration during rulings. Thats why we don't have robot judges. Also, if you think about it, seatbelt laws are unconstitutional (though I always wear mine). The government has no right to force you to protect yourself, when not an issue of public safety.

The government does have the right to preserve life...and seatbelts are apart of that...

 

[2002XLT 5,000+ posts]

Every case is different depending on the circumstance. Judges take circumstance into consideration during rulings. Thats why we don't have robot judges. Also, if you think about it, seatbelt laws are unconstitutional (though I always wear mine). The government has no right to force you to protect yourself, when not an issue of public safety.

My question is it up to the judge or the officer? To me it sounded like the cop is going to take your car, and thats that. If you get to see a judge, and that ruling is only in extreme cases as a maximum punishment. Then i would be more willing to agree. Because usually judges will let you slide once or twice before finally saying fck it, and throw the book at you.

However, i still feel that 6 months in jail or more > then taking cars.

6 months in jail first off leaves the burden on the prisoner to find someone to go get the car and pay the impound. Also, if you have ever had your car impounded, they arent gentle and every mod you did is probably going to be gone when you get it back.