I know of a woman who served several months in prison for driving without a license which had been suspended.
Why aren't penalties stiffer for people who drive without a valid license/registration/insurance?
- Thread starter grampi
- Start date
- Status
I find the whole "everyone has equal opportunities" is always said by people who have never had to suffer.
A single 35 years old mom just finished nursing school. She wakes up at 530, drops her kid off at school at 7, gets to her 40k job at 8, works a 12 hour shift, and picks up her kids from her parent's house when she gets off. By the time she's home it's 9pm. She's struggling to keep up with the work hours, taking care of her family, paying bills, and school fees. She has to choose between buying food for her kids or paying her car registration. She obviously cannot not go to work otherwise she loses her job. You still going to tell her to go learn a trade?
A guy works HVAC in a small rural town, the weather has been nice for a few months and the income just isn't rolling in. He waits for service calls all day but might get one, two, or no jobs for the day. He can't find a different job because he gets one service call at 9am and an emergency one at 8pm. His wife works but their combined income cannot pay for the bills, school, and food for them and their 2 kids. He gets pulled over and a $175 ticket for one rear taillight out now they have to go a few days without dinner. You gonna tell him that it sucks for his family and learn a different trade?
A new UPS guy starts but because of the rules he doesn't have a dedicated route. He goes to work at 7am and hopes someone called off so he might get work that day. Unfortunately he does not get a route that day and goes home unpaid. The past 3 months were the same and he might get a day or two a week to work. Because he's new, he doesn't get health insurance and his 6 year old is sick with a medication not covered by the state and the cost is $200 every month. They elect not to renew car insurance to pay for their kid's medication. You want to tell them too bad?
A 18 year old just moved to from AZ to IL for school. No money and no family support. The 18 year old has a minimum wage job but gets a $175 ticket for improperly displayed front plate. Now the kid has to work 11 hours at $15/hour to pay for the ticket and now goes to sleep hungry for two weeks to pay for the ticket.
This country is full with people who want to succeed but can't find the means to get ahead.
Tell me, how is someone going to even get to the trade school if they can't even drive to it, and almost all trade schools are first shifters? I hope you have never gone over the speed limit or never rolled a stop sign because that's criminal too.
You've heard this before (try not to vomit).... "Well, she just needs to pull up her bootstraps and make changes in her life. Learn a trade and get a better job - we need more HVAC people, plumbers, carpenters, etc. Ask grandma and grandpa to help with her child."
You didn't answer my question. Do you have the same empathy for habitual criminals as you seem to have for those who are trying to do the right things, but aren't? If so, where do you draw the line? Is there a line?
Last edited:
Why are habitual law breakers probably poor? Real crime takes money and power.
Poor? But for Grace, there go I.
Last edited:
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
I do have empathy to habitual offenders, depending what they did. I am in the criminal justice line of work, and I know numerous people who were offenders but are now contributing members of society. People who argue black and white approach to everything, usually do that because they have some issues and are projecting that anger.
So yes, I do have empathy. Because tomorrow, you will forget to bring your insurance card, roll through stop sign etc, etc. and if we apply your standards to you, you might stay out of work, your credit might be ruined etc, etc.
Watch out for what you wish for. Once society implements your standards, someone might come up with another social construct that would put you in the category of those that "undermine safety" and cause "lawlessness." There is a letter of law and a spirit of law. The letter can be written by anyone, the spirit of the law is different and more important.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Sure Karen.
So according to you, someone who continues driving illegally, and has been stopped by LEOs several times and has been driving illegally every time, these people should just be let go with no consequences? Maybe you are in the wrong line of work...
The name's grampi...
edyvw
$50 site donor 2025
Of course not. But you don;t know any of that case. Do you? DO you know whether they paid penalties? Is there something on their record? Are you actually LEO that stopped that repeated offender and than judge let him/her go? No. You are here just projecting anger at something. The flavor of the day is uninsured people; tomorrow, who knows?
You are assuming that life does not happen because life did not happen to you.
dnewton3
Staff member
We're going to take a break here.
The tempers and accusations are becoming a bit heated.
The tempers and accusations are becoming a bit heated.
dnewton3
Staff member
OK - I'm reopening this thread.
Please, folks, keep it civil or it gets locked permanently.
And let's stick to the rules; no politics or trolling comments.
Please, folks, keep it civil or it gets locked permanently.
And let's stick to the rules; no politics or trolling comments.
The problem with your arguments and others who trumpet empathy over equal penalties is the snowball effect. Once people see that you can get leniency by being broke, even if they are legitimately struggling as you say, then more and more people will use the example as an excuse to forgo auto insurance or other things.
“If they don’t have to pay, why should I?”
Even worse, this causes insurance rates to climb. A downward spiral.
It’s called a moral hazard. Once you get too soft on enforcing laws, people WILL notice and respond accordingly. Also, those that do pay their share will also get irritated and lash out in other ways.
And don’t say stuff like “oh you must not care about poor people.” I agree that people who are In abject poverty should be helped financially, but I don’t think if’s by letting them slide by the rules because they are victims of circumstances or whatever.
If we all wanted go band together and reduce government spending and divert it to helping subsidizing the poor and auto insurance, why not consider that instead?
Last edited:
Welfare.
I've been watching youtube police chase videos lately for entertainment. Somebody runs from the police, wrecks their car and totals two squad cars (minimum) in the process, fire department, ambulance, jail sentences, innocent bystanders. Guns in the car, drugs. Easily create more of a monetary loss in a few hours than I could possibly produce in ten years of my life. The whole thing ends with about $3 of department issued ammunition.
So what? It was a stolen car. No insurance. All the innocent bystanders gonna have to make their uninsured deductible, hospital bills, missed work, etc. The criminal has nothing to loose. Police record? Felony charges? So what? It's not like it's going to keep them out of college or from holding a job in the future. That was never in the cards.
So either they get their birth certificate revoked, live out their lives in jail (welfare) or go mooch off a culture of gov housing/foodstamps/healthcare/iphone, etc. Plenty of baby mammas and welfare to support yourselves, get back to drug dealing, and pass your 72 IQ genetics on to the next generation of indigents.
End welfare. If you don't produce, you're hungry. Yeah, there'll be some hungry kids. Sorry. Maybe hunger will motivate them to study. Better hungry than criminal.
Poverty needs to be a penalty again. No more free stuff.
I've been watching youtube police chase videos lately for entertainment. Somebody runs from the police, wrecks their car and totals two squad cars (minimum) in the process, fire department, ambulance, jail sentences, innocent bystanders. Guns in the car, drugs. Easily create more of a monetary loss in a few hours than I could possibly produce in ten years of my life. The whole thing ends with about $3 of department issued ammunition.
So what? It was a stolen car. No insurance. All the innocent bystanders gonna have to make their uninsured deductible, hospital bills, missed work, etc. The criminal has nothing to loose. Police record? Felony charges? So what? It's not like it's going to keep them out of college or from holding a job in the future. That was never in the cards.
So either they get their birth certificate revoked, live out their lives in jail (welfare) or go mooch off a culture of gov housing/foodstamps/healthcare/iphone, etc. Plenty of baby mammas and welfare to support yourselves, get back to drug dealing, and pass your 72 IQ genetics on to the next generation of indigents.
End welfare. If you don't produce, you're hungry. Yeah, there'll be some hungry kids. Sorry. Maybe hunger will motivate them to study. Better hungry than criminal.
Poverty needs to be a penalty again. No more free stuff.
Last edited:
Love the “what about a single mother…” arguments.
What about her? She should’ve kept her legs closed.
What about a man that has most of his income taken away by the family court? Can he drive without insurance?
What about her? She should’ve kept her legs closed.
What about a man that has most of his income taken away by the family court? Can he drive without insurance?
The single unemployed mom gets gov handouts. The calculation actually rewards for not having a man in the house. So our system of ending poverty actually rewards bad choices.
Sorry, some bad choices have life consequences. Unfortunately those consequenses might extend to your family and children. It's not the gov's job to protect anyone from the consequences of your bad choices.
Well yeah, actions have consequences, but according to many, we should feel sorry for these women and give them a break.
The world is full of simps unfortunately, and the cycle continues. It’s not just the government incentives, it’s men simping for these women that is an issue as well.
But why are you pinning it only at the women? They and their sperm donor are both responsible. It's not just that the "system" doesn't hold the men responsible (no daddy name on the birth certificate, mom is no longer eligible for gov benefits), it's that those moms and dads live in a culture/society that doesn't hold them accountable. If that money came from your pocket you'd want them held accountable. Somehow because it's gov money it doesn't matter, but the impact is the same: rewards for bad behavior.
100% of the foster kids that have been in our home have been from gov supported moms in gov supported housing with gov provided phones/food/medical, dads not in the picture. What is that kid learning? Our most recent foster would actually argue with my wife. She'd say I went to work and describe my profession. He'd argue and say, no, I went to the store. I'm working on my car. I'm watching TV. He had no concept of why a man/provider/protector would leave the house in the morning.
Back to the OP - you generally don't see these kinds of issues (uninsured, suspended license, repeat offender, traffic chase, stolen vehicle) from people that have something to loose.
Last edited:
- Status
