[Marco911]

Originally Posted by dangonay

So I find it really funny when people talk about how the law should apply equally for the rich and poor. It should, but the reality is it doesn't. So when someone who's "rich" gets screwed over (like these guys losing their cars) it shouldn't surprise anyone to read so many comments like "it's good for them" or "daddy couldn't buy you out of this problem, could he". It's just backlash for all the other stuff wealthy people seem to get away with that pisses a lot of people off.

My statement was about how the law applies when people get charged with a crime. Rich or poor, it shouldn't matter what charges are brought up against you. I don't really see anything wrong with the rich being able to afford a better defense than the poor. Being rich still does not guarantee being found innocent.

Personally this case doesn't bother me. I could care less if they were rich or not. The only thing I'm glad about is someone who was way over the top in terms how badly they were driving got screwed over. In my mind, driving this aggressievly constitutes criminal behaviour. And using your vehicle criminally means it can be forfeited.

I disagree. In a free society, the government has to follow due process and fair standards no matter how heinous the offense. A bullet to Pickton's head might have been economic justice, but our charter rights guarantee he gets his day in court. If the govt wants to go after the Ferrari and M6, I would expect them to be fair and go after EVERY vehicle whose drivers are charged with the same offenses as they did.

Sure the civil rights people will be screaming and yelling over this and bringing up the old "slippery slope" argument, but I don't see it going this way. I think forfeitures will be a very rare event saved only for the most severe of offenders. I doubt even one single person on RS will ever have their car forfeited over the years, even though many will talk like this is going to be a regular event.

That is not justice if the govt only goes after expensive cars, or the most extreme of cases. Fact of the matter, if you break the same law, the charges and penalties you face should be the same as anyone else. The govt should not be in the business of suing in civil court and picking and choosing who they go after. That is the slippery slope.

Hell, the guys didn't even go to court to stand up for themselves. What does that tell you?

They negotiated a settlement, which they probably felt gave them the best economic outcome. That is why they got to keep a portion of the sales proceeds. If I had a Honda Civic, and the govt was coming after that, you'd better believe I would fight it.