Truck seizure goes too far

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Mon, 28 May 2001 10:03:06 GMT

FROM MOUNTAIN MEDIA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED NOV. 15, 2000
THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz
Truck seizure goes too far

Karl Dir of Henderson, Nev. doesn't make a very attractive champion in the battle for property rights.

With his unruly black hair and beard, he's not exactly a suit-and-tie kind of guy. More importantly, back in April of 1999, Dir was driving home from a drinking bout when he says he reached down for a clipboard on the floor of his truck cab. What's undisputed is that he then lost control of his truck and slammed it into the mobile home of neighbor Harold Combs of Mona Lane, who was injured in his bed by falling debris.

Police reports and court findings reveal Mr. Dir didn't heap glory on himself, even then. Rather than offering assistance to the injured Mr. Combs, Dir fled the scene, returning with his father only 20 minutes later.

At that point, Karl Dir was arrested on felony charges including DUI, battery with a deadly weapon, and leaving the scene. His truck was towed away.

But the next day, prosecutors opted not to pursue the felony charges, apparently based in part on the fact that Dir's last DUI arrest had been seven years earlier, in Oregon.

Pleading guilty to the misdemeanors, Dir lost his Nevada driver's license for a year and was fined $500. He's not disputing those penalties. What he wants is his truck back.

Henderson authorities -- who have kept the truck for a year and a half, even as Dir and his father, William, continued to make their truck payments -- argue that in a civil asset forfeiture the city "is not required to plead or prove that a (suspect) has been charged with or convicted of any criminal offense."

But that may be wrong on its face, in addition to being an insidious doctrine. State law would appear to allow seizure of a motor vehicle or "conveyance" -- quite correctly -- only if it was used in the commission of a felony, such as murder and robbery.

Perhaps felony charges should have been pursued against Dir. But they weren't, and if the Henderson City Attorney has a problem with that, his objection lies with someone else entirely.

Police in neighboring Las Vegas say they do not permanently seize the vehicles of drunk driving suspects. Instead, the report that such measures are reserved for cases of alleged narcotics trafficking, or getaway vehicles in felony robberies.

New York City started seizing the cars of all drunken driving suspects two years ago -- without waiting for convictions -- but that's unconstitutional. Such measures are being fought in the courts both in New York and in Oakland, Calif. -- in the latter case, by the American Civil Liberties Union.

With good reason. What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty," let alone "letting the punishment fit the crime"? For many in the working class, losing the family car means losing the ability even to earn a living.

Karl and William Dir have even refused an offer from the City of Henderson to give them back their truck in exchange for a towing fee, arguing that they're taking their stand on principle.

Pardon me, but once the matter in dispute is reduced to that small a sum, I'd say the Dirs would be wise to accept the offer. If you're arrested for drunken driving and your vehicle has been in a collision, one would normally expect that vehicle to be towed away, and to absorb the cost of that towing.

Was the vehicle in good enough shape that it could have been safely driven away by co-owner William Dir -- Karl's father -- rather than being towed? Might it have been needed in state custody the next day for further forensic evidence-gathering? Surely these are judgment calls best left to the officers at the scene. The cops clearly believed at the time they were dealing with felony offenses; it was reasonable to assume the truck might have sustained some serious damage; the tow-truck driver came out late at night and deserves his fee.

The Dirs should pay the towing charge. But as for the notion that their vehicle should be "forfeited" to the government based on the misdemeanor charges which eventually resulted: That's going too far.

In law and justice, we have to be careful of the precedents we set. What would be next? Shall the government seize the home of a property owner who commits a misdemeanor by carelessly dispatching some "threatened" rat or lizard or bug with his lawn mower?

Property rights are too vital an underpinning of our heritage of freedom to allow them to be eroded any further. I have no sympathy for drunks who crash into people's homes. Karl Dir's behavior was potentially deadly; a repetition might result in consequences far more serious.

But in a day and age when the number of "laws" is multiplying so quickly that it's hard to get to work in the morning without breaking some, it's all the more important to set limits on such a potentially devastating government power.

Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editorial page editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, and editor of Financial Privacy Report (subscribe by calling Nelson at 612-895-8757.) His book, "Send in the Waco Killers: Essays on the Freedom Movement, 1993-1998," is available by dialing 1-800-244-2224; or via web site http://www.thespiritof76.com/wacokillers.html.

Vin Suprynowicz, vin@lvrj.com

"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right." -- Eugene V. Debs (1855-1926)

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and thus clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." -- H.L. Mencken

Add comment Edit post Add post

Previous Posts:
The king's men are doing fine
An Important Invitation from Vin Suprynowicz
Getting by with a little help from his friends
The 'secrecy' noose tightens
Beware the pennies on your eyes
'Where we'd have the Haves and the Have-nots'
A chance to really clear the air
The Parade of Collectivism marches on
Goofy 9th Circuit finds new reason to reverse convictions
Will rewrite nation's history to suit new tenant

Navigation

History

Quotes

Government doesn't work. Never did. Never will. Can't. But there are lots of good people. Love them.

-- Bill St. Clair

The Atlanta Declaration

Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission.

-- L. Neil Smith

Reread that pesky first clause of the Second Amendment. It doesn't say what any of us thought it said. What it says is that infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms is treason. What else do you call an act that endangers "the security of a free state"? And if it's treason, then it's punishable by death. I suggest due process, speedy trials, and public hangings.

-- L. Neil Smith

A Penalty Clause for the Bill of Rights

Any official, appointed or elected, at any level of government, who attempts, through legislative act or other means, to nullify, evade, or avoid the provisions of the first ten amendments to this Constitution, or of the Thirteenth Amendment, shall be summarily removed from office, and, upon conviction, deprived of all pay and benefits including pension, and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

-- L. Neil Smith

Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents.

-- John Lott, commenting on the National Academy of Sciences report on gun control laws.

Who is a libertarian?

Zero Aggression Principle ("Zap")

"A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being, or to advocate or delegate its initiation. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim."

-- L. Neil Smith

(Formerly called the "Non-Aggression Principle", or "NAP")

Why Did It Have to be... Guns?

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

-- L. Neil Smith

Concise

"Tell me," I was once asked, "What do you think about gun control? Give me the short answer." To which I replied, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

-- Mike Vanderboegh

Also from The Atlanta Declaration:

... like going to the bathroom, breathing, eating, sleeping, or making love, it turns out that self-defense is a bodily function one cannot safely or effectively delegate to a second party.

-- L. Neil Smith

This does not mean that "Marijuana should be available by prescription." It means that morphine sulfate should be available in five pound bags at the supermarket for a couple of bucks, like sugar... but probably in a different aisle, to avoid confusion.

-- Vin Suprynowicz

If you refuse to pay unjust taxes, your property will be confiscated. If you attempt to defend your property, you will be arrested. If you resist arrest, you will be clubbed. If you defend yourself against clubbing, you will be shot dead. These procedures are known as the Rule of Law.

-- Edward Abbey

The state can only survive as long as a majority is programmed to believe that theft isn't wrong if it's called taxation or asset forfeiture or eminent domain, that assault and kidnapping isn't wrong if it's called arrest, that mass murder isn't wrong if it's called war.

-- Bill St. Clair