To add insult to injury, there are court fees imposed, even if you are acquitted. So you are still out-of-pocket.

And to make matters worse, a private corporation is in charge of collecting fines and issuing reimbursements for acquittals. Of course the company has a terrible track record of getting refunds issued. They really go out of their way to get your money back to you…. NOT.

The higher courts so far have allowed the lower courts and police to confiscate private property/money prior to conviction.

I’m all for crushing the cars of law breakers. HOWEVER the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights (supposedly) gives us the right to a) being regarded as innocent until proven guilty in a court b) rights to our property and c) due process.

This Chicago “law enforcement tactic” (which is really extortion with menaces) fails on all 3 counts, from what I can see.

Can you get your car out without paying the fee while you are contesting the charge?

Sounds kind of Fishy but it is Chicago…

If you or your kids are woken repeatedly by car stereos or alarms it’s not a minor problem.

Dynamic
You don’t need a licence to drive a horse and buggy on the road but you do need buggy plates – at least in Indiana.

No matter how many times one’s driver education teacher (and one’s parents) repeat this mantra, it just isn’t so. Granted, it’s not listed in the bill of rights, but still there exist only a few reasons why the “right” could be denied.

When initially getting a license to drive a motor vehicle (does one need a license to drive a horse and buggy? I wonder) one can only be denied for safety reasons – e.g. one can’t pass the eye test, one can’t pass a test on traffic signs and rules of the road, or one can’t demonstrate an ability to guide a car safely around a circuit of about a mile and a half.

The eye test is about as rigorous as it gets, but still these are the standards and if one meets them, there is simply no justification for the denial of a license. That makes it quite distinct from a privilege, which could be denied on a whim, with any justification, or no justification at all.

After obtaining a license it may be revoked for various offenses, mostly having to do -again- with safety. If one has too many speeding tickets, to many tickets for reckless drivng, too many times (once is enough) caught drving while under the influence, then one isn’t being safe, thereby justifying revocation of one’s license. Again, this is very different than revoking a license because the authorities don’t like the cut of your jib.

Driving is a right, but like any other right, there are limitations.

I can see impounding a car when someone is driving without a current valid icense. For one thing, suspended license means one is not competent to drive home. Impounding for having a loud radio seems ridiculous. This is disturbing the peace. I don’t see why one automatically forfiets an expensive piece of property (even a $1,000 car is a valuable property) for a minor civil infraction.

On another note: I live in Chicago and these laws are no joke… I have a friend who had his car impounded for 6 outstanding parking tickets. Parking tickets!!! An outstanding parking ticket used to be something everyone just had and no one paid… they were almost like resident ID cards – you couldn’t really claim you were from Chicago unless you had one. Not the case anymore…

Impound them and crush them. Sell the scrap to cover expenses.

What else do you do if they round up 50 cars a night for a week? Where are all those rust heaps and decent cars going to be stored? Who is going to pay for that?

This is a really bad idea, and hopefully the impounding for various silly reasons (yes, loud stereos is a ludicrous reason for impounding a vehicle when a real violation or crime could have been handled) will be put to a swift end.