View Poll Results: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offense?

Voters
52. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes,but only if they can not find licensed driver to drive the vehicle home.

    21 40.38%
  • Yes,regardless if they can find a licensed driver to drive the vehicle home.

    15 28.85%
  • They should never tow a unlicensed driver's vehicle.

    10 19.23%
  • other

    6 11.54%
Page 13 of 21 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 204

Thread: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offense?

  1. #121
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    No it is not mandatory to ticket people nor is it mandatory to tow a vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver. And I agree that no one should be breaking the law, but **** happens. I want those triage decisions that remain in the discretion of an officer to remain available for them. Like I said sometimes **** happens and towing a vehicle should not be the only option.

    But I find this discussion a little funny, I mean just how many unlicensed drivers are there out there? While googling to find the answer I came across this site Auto Insurance with No Drivers License - AUTO INSURANCE .COM lol
    well i never said make it mandatory im just saying it is very just and people have no reason crying over it and making up false premises like it takes away due process LOL

    also as far as the auto insurance with no licenses im fine with that BUT it should be listed as non operational insurance or something like that. It probably already exists in some form.

    I might be a car collector and need insurance or saving a car for a family member, theres definitely a need for insurance even if you dont drive.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #122
    Advisor Swit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-13-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    390

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    i would NOT have a problem with that but WHY?
    why is it necessary?
    Because of the presumption of innocence implicit in due process.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    why should the cop have to go out of his way to help someone breaking the law?
    No one is asking the cop to go and find another driver for the vehicle, we are asking the offending driver to.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    and once the car gets back on his property whats to stop him from breaking the law tomorrow?
    Absolutely nothing. But since the car can be retrieved the next day (or even next hour) from the impound lot I fail to see how this is relevant. This situation occurs whether the vehicle gets towed or not.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    what if he doesn't have a license because of a dangerous medical condition or prior crimes the cop can see?
    This doesn't change the dynamic of the situation. The person is still driving illegally, what is in contest here is whether the car should be summarily towed at owners expense or should the driver be given a reasonable allowance to find alternate removal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    also your response to restaurant and gun is just dishonesty LOL its semantics
    no they cant take the resturant away but they can shut it down and return it to you later by YOUR definition where the due process LMAO like I said YOUR definition CHANGES for YOUR convenience. Anyway im not going to get side tracked
    Ok... hey you brought it up, not me. and it wasn't dishonest or semantic.
    here is the difference:
    want to legally OWN a gun ------> Requires Gun License
    want to legally OWN a car ------> No requirements
    want to legally OWN a restaurant -----> No requirements
    THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE LOOK CLOSE
    want to legally OPERATE a gun --------> No requirements (At least here in Illinois)
    want to legally OPERATE a car --------> Requires Driver's License (assuming on a public road)
    want too legally OPERATE a restaurant --------> Requires Restaurant license (and numerous other certifications)

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    theres a simple solution to all of this, dont want your car towed DONT BREAK THE LAW AND DRIVE ILLEGALLY lmao

    like i said there no lose of due process here and towing the car is just, doesnt HAVE to be done but it certainly is just, dont like it, dont break the law and drive without a license
    I no longer understand what your position is regarding the topic of this thread. Are you in favor of manditory towing, towing only if the driver cannot find another driver to move the car?

  3. #123
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Swit View Post
    1.)Because of the presumption of innocence implicit in due process.

    2.)No one is asking the cop to go and find another driver for the vehicle, we are asking the offending driver to.

    3.)Absolutely nothing. But since the car can be retrieved the next day (or even next hour) from the impound lot I fail to see how this is relevant. This situation occurs whether the vehicle gets towed or not.

    4.)This doesn't change the dynamic of the situation. The person is still driving illegally, what is in contest here is whether the car should be summarily towed at owners expense or should the driver be given a reasonable allowance to find alternate removal.


    Ok... hey you brought it up, not me. and it wasn't dishonest or semantic.
    here is the difference:
    want to legally OWN a gun ------> Requires Gun License
    want to legally OWN a car ------> No requirements
    want to legally OWN a restaurant -----> No requirements
    THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE LOOK CLOSE
    want to legally OPERATE a gun --------> No requirements (At least here in Illinois)
    want to legally OPERATE a car --------> Requires Driver's License (assuming on a public road)
    want too legally OPERATE a restaurant --------> Requires Restaurant license (and numerous other certifications)


    I no longer understand what your position is regarding the topic of this thread. Are you in favor of manditory towing, towing only if the driver cannot find another driver to move the car?
    it seems you dont understand a lot about what im saying and making a lot of presumtions
    DUE PROCESS IS NOT IMPACTED lol

    now on to your responses

    1.) this is not impacted he can still prove his innocence
    2.) and then what? the cop waits around for this to happen? LOL and again the friend drives the care home and the guy can break the law again no thanks thats dumb
    3.) no his car stays there until the trial where he can prove he has a license or other arrangements are made allowing him to take it
    4.) of course it changes the dynamic if you live in REALITY, if his car licences was taken away for say vehicular homicide why on gods green earth would a cop risk him getting in the car again once the cop wasnt around later LOL

    5.)nonsense and dishonesty that is a wast of time

    my stance hasnt changed
    if a cop pulls you over and you have no licenses which they can check he has every right to tow your car, does he HAVE to? no but it would be the smart thing to do and any cop that did so would get my full support because due process is not impacted in reality

    im in favor of what ever the officers decides just like a speeding ticket and if there is priors it should be mandatory, cops dont need to help people breaking the law

    again it all comes down to the obvious fact in the room, dont want your car towed dont drive illegally LMAO common sense
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #124
    Advisor Swit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-13-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    390

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    well i never said make it mandatory im just saying it is very just and people have no reason crying over it and making up false premises like it takes away due process LOL

    also as far as the auto insurance with no licenses im fine with that BUT it should be listed as non operational insurance or something like that. It probably already exists in some form.

    I might be a car collector and need insurance or saving a car for a family member, theres definitely a need for insurance even if you dont drive.
    The general idea is this. Earlier in the thread people suggested that even if there was a legal driver in the passenger seat who was willing and able to move the car, the vehicle should be towed anyway. Since the States only interest is the removal of hazard or blockage from the roadway, the act of not allowing the most expedient remedy (allowing the passenger to move the car) can only be viewed as punitive. Hence the punishment being applied BEFORE due process has taken place. Furthermore, IF there is a passenger in the car who is willing, able, and legal to drive the car, they MUST be allowed the opportunity to relocate the vehicle as there is no state interest in not allowing them to. That is where the due process thing came up..... it was not saying that the mere act of towing a vehicle violates due process.

  5. #125
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Swit View Post
    The general idea is this. Earlier in the thread people suggested that even if there was a legal driver in the passenger seat who was willing and able to move the car, the vehicle should be towed anyway. Since the States only interest is the removal of hazard or blockage from the roadway, the act of not allowing the most expedient remedy (allowing the passenger to move the car) can only be viewed as punitive. Hence the punishment being applied BEFORE due process has taken place. Furthermore, IF there is a passenger in the car who is willing, able, and legal to drive the car, they MUST be allowed the opportunity to relocate the vehicle as there is no state interest in not allowing them to. That is where the due process thing came up..... it was not saying that the mere act of towing a vehicle violates due process.
    the PUNITIVE act is nothing more than your opinion and its dishonest. NOTHING more than that. The arrest you and lock you up BEFORE your trail does that violate due process?

    If that said driver is ALSO owner of the care or their insurance has that car registered then id be fine with it, other wise I support the cop in what ever he does.

    Guy gets stopped an has an illegal concealed gun on him, im with him, im his buddy I have a CWP, should I be allowed to take the gun or does that violate due process?

    please stop with the silliness

    in REALITY no due process is violated
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #126
    Advisor Swit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-13-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    390

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    the PUNITIVE act is nothing more than your opinion and its dishonest. NOTHING more than that.
    If there is someone willing, able and legal to relocate the car on hand. How can you claim that forcing the car to be towed, at the owners expense, be viewed as anything other than punitive?
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    The arrest you and lock you up BEFORE your trail does that violate due process?
    No.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    If that said driver is ALSO owner of the care or their insurance has that car registered then id be fine with it, other wise I support the cop in what ever he does.
    I was running on the assumption that the car was legally operable. I.e. insured, registered, in good mechanical condition, etc...
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    Guy gets stopped an has an illegal concealed gun on him, im with him, im his buddy I have a CWP, should I be allowed to take the gun or does that violate due process?
    You could not take possession of the firearm as a matter of law. It would immediately become material evidence in a felony gun possession charge.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    please stop with the silliness
    right back at ya.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    in REALITY no due process is violated
    I never made made a claim that in reality due process was being violated.
    Last edited by Swit; 12-30-11 at 05:43 PM.

  7. #127
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Swit View Post
    If there is someone willing, able and legal to relocate the car on hand. How can you claim that forcing the car to be towed, at the owners expense, be viewed as anything other than punitive?

    2.) No.

    3.)I was running on the assumption that the car was legally operable. I.e. insured, registered, in good mechanical condition, etc...

    4.)You could not take possession of the firearm as a matter of law. It would immediately become material evidence in a felony gun possession charge.

    right back at ya.

    5.) I never made made a claim that in reality due process was being violated.
    1.) easy i dont try to pretend i know exactly what the motive is based on my own bias opinion and why is it the cops duty to help out someone breaking the law or risk further broken laws, danger or damages? no matter how bad you want it to be calling it punitive is nothing more than your opinion.
    2.) hypocrite by your logic then
    3.) IMO thats not enough if its solely owned by the person who broke the law and no one present has that vehicle on their insurance
    4.) so could the car also be used as evidence if the cop wants to, not felony but evidence
    5.) actually you did you said its punitive BEFORE due process and neither are true post 110 and 122 just to name 2
    Last edited by AGENT J; 12-30-11 at 05:59 PM.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #128
    Advisor Swit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-13-16 @ 12:44 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    390

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    1.) easy i dont try to pretend i know exactly what the motive is based on my own bias opinion and why is it the cops duty to help out someone breaking the law or risk further broken laws, danger or damages? no matter how bad you want it to be calling it punitive is nothing more than your opinion.
    Fair enough, I will acquiesce that I do not know the police officer's motivation, can you give me an example of some non-punitive motivation for this situation because I cannot think of any.
    Keep in mind the context:
    1. car is legally operable
    2. there is a legal driver able and willing to relocate the vehicle right there on the spot. (passenger)
    3. The police officer refuses to allow the passenger to take possession of the car which would both A. Extend the period of time it take to vacate the vehicle from the roadway (waiting for the tow to arrive). and B. Prevent the passenger from a completely legal activity (borrowing and driving a car).
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    2.) hypocrite by your logic then
    How so? Due process allows for suspects to held for some period of time (here in Illinois I believe its 48 hours) before either A. Offering the option of posting bail, or B. petitioning the court for a denial of bail based on some criteria (usually flight risk). As long as A or B occur within the legally codified time frame due process has not been violated.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    3.) IMO thats not enough if its solely owned by the person who broke the law and no one present has that vehicle on their insurance
    Well if the car is not insured then its not legally operable..... I don't understand where the confusion is. I even listed insured as a qualifier of legally operable. It really seems like you just being argumentative at this point.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    4.) so could the car also be used as evidence if the cop wants to, not felony but evidence
    It doesn't matter whether its felony or not. What exactly is the automobile evidence of? If he was driving illegally (suspended license) no matter what car he was driving it would still be illegal. In this situation the object is disjoint from the action. There is nothing the car can show that has any relevance as to whether or not the person was driving illegally.
    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    5.) actually you did you said its punitive BEFORE due process and neither are true
    No, what I said was that IF the states action is punitive in nature, and IF it is applied before innocence or guilt is determined THEN a due process violation has occurred. I cannot explain it any clearer.

  9. #129
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Swit View Post
    1.)Fair enough, I will acquiesce that I do not know the police officer's motivation, can you give me an example of some non-punitive motivation for this situation because I cannot think of any.
    Keep in mind the context:
    1. car is legally operable
    2. there is a legal driver able and willing to relocate the vehicle right there on the spot. (passenger)
    3. The police officer refuses to allow the passenger to take possession of the car which would both A. Extend the period of time it take to vacate the vehicle from the roadway (waiting for the tow to arrive). and B. Prevent the passenger from a completely legal activity (borrowing and driving a car).

    2.)How so? Due process allows for suspects to held for some period of time (here in Illinois I believe its 48 hours) before either A. Offering the option of posting bail, or B. petitioning the court for a denial of bail based on some criteria (usually flight risk). As long as A or B occur within the legally codified time frame due process has not been violated.

    3.)Well if the car is not insured then its not legally operable..... I don't understand where the confusion is. I even listed insured as a qualifier of legally operable. It really seems like you just being argumentative at this point.

    It doesn't matter whether its felony or not. What exactly is the automobile evidence of? If he was driving illegally (suspended license) no matter what car he was driving it would still be illegal. In this situation the object is disjoint from the action. There is nothing the car can show that has any relevance as to whether or not the person was driving illegally.

    No, what I said was that IF the states action is punitive in nature, and IF it is applied before innocence or guilt is determined THEN a due process violation has occurred. I cannot explain it any clearer.
    LMAO all i hear is moaning and somebody trying to make it easier for criminals and harder for cops

    1.) easy the cop doesnt want the item used in breaking the law back in the suspects hands DONE LMAO or for SAFTEY. Its not the cops responsibility to cater to someone breaking the law.
    2.) because YOU make up a premise for towing a car to be against due process YOU not the law YOU make it up but when that same weak inaccurate logic is applied elsewhere its fine lol
    3.) wow what the hell are you talking about LOL Im talking about the reaming people left if that car isnt on their insurance its a no go
    4.) wasnt saying it matters if its felony or not?????? I was saying its not a felony like your example LOL Its evidence if the cop wants it to be
    5 then you imeddiately state after that "then there can be no argument for not allowing a different licensed driver to remove the vehicle from the roadway (i.e. a passenger that is present at the time of arrest)." so according to your own words anytime a care is towed under these conditions it must be punitive because according to you theres no toher reason to do such LMAO

    I agree you are right you could not have been more clear and you are clearly wrong

    but Im done playing semantics and talking circles with you this is my statements and it stands.

    It doesnt have to be mandatory but the cop is totally just in towing the car when it is being driven illegally and that car is own by that person driving it illegally. And in towing the car there is no infringement of due process.

    this is my statement prove it wrong

    and of course, if you dont want your car towed dont break the law why is this common sense so hard to accept
    Last edited by AGENT J; 12-30-11 at 07:34 PM.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #130
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,255

    Re: Should unlicensed drivers have their vehicles towed when pulled over for an offen

    Quote Originally Posted by Risky Thicket View Post
    Yes, fascism.
    Holding someone accountable is fascism, got it!
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 13 of 21 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •