Indeed, though I would suggest that, for more significant infractions, state seizure of the vehicle (as the tool used to commit the crime) should be an option, with proceeds from vehicle sales by the state going to safety infrastructure and perhaps a victim restitution fund.
People are very attached to their cars, so that’s a punishment, and they won’t be needing it anymore without a license!
My wife went to school to be a paralegal. Her first job was working asset forfeiture for a county DA’s office. That experience single-handedly made her have to go back to school to switch careers. It really is one of the most unjust aspects of our justice system, which is really saying something.
Precisely. I’m saying that, if we already have it anyway, we ought to regulate it. If we can abolish it, great. If not, then it should be heavily regulated, with the funds earmarked for things that aren’t enforcement-related, so that there’s less perverse incentive for law enforcement to just grab things for shits, giggles and greed. The government can and will seize your home for nonpayment of taxes, so it’s not like this doesn’t already happen outside of civil asset forfeiture. It’s just a matter of how well-regulated the system is, and what steps are taken to reduce perverse incentives.
In the current situation? Absolutely. I’m fairly certain it would take a violent uprising, then a constitutional convention, to actually count the US as a country with laws. It’s full, mask-off kakistocratic corpofascism.
There are, however, individual states and jurisdictions which could implement it well with reform.
Power tripping murderpigs and ecocidal narcissists with their two-ton pollution powered people crushers are basically equivalent evils, anything that pits them against each other without adding any risk to pedestrians is a win.
Punishment doesn’t prevent behavior that already happened and is usually missed. Road modifications help every time.
My town has a major road that was one of the most infuriating and dangerous in town. It was two lanes in each direction, constant jockeying for position or to make the light or to get around a turning car.
All it took was repainting. Now it’s one lane in each direction with turning lanes. There is no jockeying for position since it’s only one lane. But turning cars are no longer blocking so no infuriating stop and go. They even coordinated the lights.
Now that road is slower, calmer, no road rage or angry drivers and everyone gets through in less time
that road is slower, calmer, no road rage or angry drivers and everyone gets through in less time
Perception is a funny thing. Experiencing road rage and anger distorts one’s sense of how much time something takes. The true test of “everyone gets through in less time” is a clock and a car counter.
And I’ve done that. While it’s tough to get repeatable traffic, I go through there often. For my most common destination, gps estimate is consistently 3 min less than before
I lived in a city that was doing a lot of lane count reduction, installation of traffic circles, etc. Results were… mixed. It definitely was achieving “aesthetic improvement” with more trees and green features along what used to be bare asphalt and concrete corridors - sometimes the traffic did “flow better” on the lane count reduced roads, but I think a lot of that was attributable to significant volume diverting to alternate routes. Then they had their “disaster area” situations that only got worse no matter what they did - overdevelopment underserved is a formidable problem.
…or what if we actually punish people who pilot their two-ton death machines irresponsibly?
Remember, though: if the punishment is a fine, then to the rich, it’s not a punishment. It’s a price.
You don’t even have to be rich-rich. Car-related fines are a joke.
I was thinking more along the lines of losing one’s license.
Don’t forget that the wealthy can afford lawyers to forestall license revocation, usually indefinitely.
Indeed, though I would suggest that, for more significant infractions, state seizure of the vehicle (as the tool used to commit the crime) should be an option, with proceeds from vehicle sales by the state going to safety infrastructure and perhaps a victim restitution fund.
People are very attached to their cars, so that’s a punishment, and they won’t be needing it anymore without a license!
Absolutely not if you’re talking the US. We already have civil forfeiture which is abused far to easily and frequently.
My wife went to school to be a paralegal. Her first job was working asset forfeiture for a county DA’s office. That experience single-handedly made her have to go back to school to switch careers. It really is one of the most unjust aspects of our justice system, which is really saying something.
Precisely. I’m saying that, if we already have it anyway, we ought to regulate it. If we can abolish it, great. If not, then it should be heavily regulated, with the funds earmarked for things that aren’t enforcement-related, so that there’s less perverse incentive for law enforcement to just grab things for shits, giggles and greed. The government can and will seize your home for nonpayment of taxes, so it’s not like this doesn’t already happen outside of civil asset forfeiture. It’s just a matter of how well-regulated the system is, and what steps are taken to reduce perverse incentives.
Shits, giggles and power trips are the only reason most LEOs get into the career in the first place. If they’re greedy, they go into politics.
Good point!!
Forgive me if I doubt it could be appropriately regulated and properly applied in the US.
In the current situation? Absolutely. I’m fairly certain it would take a violent uprising, then a constitutional convention, to actually count the US as a country with laws. It’s full, mask-off kakistocratic corpofascism.
There are, however, individual states and jurisdictions which could implement it well with reform.
Sure, no problems with power-tripping LEOs yet, let’s give them more ability to abuse their position arbitrarily.
Power tripping murderpigs and ecocidal narcissists with their two-ton pollution powered people crushers are basically equivalent evils, anything that pits them against each other without adding any risk to pedestrians is a win.
If it scales with income, it stays a punishment.
If it scales with wealth. The rich are very good at hiding their income.
Punishment doesn’t prevent behavior that already happened and is usually missed. Road modifications help every time.
My town has a major road that was one of the most infuriating and dangerous in town. It was two lanes in each direction, constant jockeying for position or to make the light or to get around a turning car.
All it took was repainting. Now it’s one lane in each direction with turning lanes. There is no jockeying for position since it’s only one lane. But turning cars are no longer blocking so no infuriating stop and go. They even coordinated the lights.
Now that road is slower, calmer, no road rage or angry drivers and everyone gets through in less time
Perception is a funny thing. Experiencing road rage and anger distorts one’s sense of how much time something takes. The true test of “everyone gets through in less time” is a clock and a car counter.
And I’ve done that. While it’s tough to get repeatable traffic, I go through there often. For my most common destination, gps estimate is consistently 3 min less than before
I lived in a city that was doing a lot of lane count reduction, installation of traffic circles, etc. Results were… mixed. It definitely was achieving “aesthetic improvement” with more trees and green features along what used to be bare asphalt and concrete corridors - sometimes the traffic did “flow better” on the lane count reduced roads, but I think a lot of that was attributable to significant volume diverting to alternate routes. Then they had their “disaster area” situations that only got worse no matter what they did - overdevelopment underserved is a formidable problem.