Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That may be your "point" but you're just making it up. Most citations come with fines and other penalties. If there is actually nothing along those lines, then go ahead and demonstrate that.
Don’t you think if they actually were required to pay a fine, the article would have indicated such pertinent info? You are assuming the citation includes a fine without a shred of evidence. If they are unwilling to impound their cars due to an assumption of creating a financial hardship, why on earth would they impose a fine?
No, but it's probably a safe assumption. You asserted that citations were not penalties. Citations almost unequivocally include penalties. You also asserted that we can assume that no penalties exist here, which seems strong.
No, but it's probably a safe assumption. You asserted that citations were not penalties. Citations almost unequivocally include penalties. You also asserted that we can assume that no penalties exist here, which seems strong.
We already know their cars will no longer be impounded, and they will not be arrested. Unless you can prove otherwise, there is absolutely no evidence that this new policy includes a fine, or for that matter, any punitive measure for illegals caught in DUI checkpoints driving without a license. End of story.
We already know their cars will no longer be impounded, and they will not be arrested. Unless you can prove otherwise, there is absolutely no evidence that this new policy includes a fine, or for that matter, any punitive measure for illegals caught in DUI checkpoints driving without a license. End of story.
The fact that there is a citation is in fact evidence that there's likely a fine, but whatevs, ya know. Surely you can assume your conclusion freely.
At the beginning of this thread malamute was claiming that this law only impacted illegals. It took multiple posts for people to understand that this was not the case, and that this was referring specifically to DUI checkpoints. And now, naturally, someone has hopped on ready to defend every assumption most favorable to their position that illegal immigrants are secretly running this nation from some sort of underground bunker while (accurately) pointing out that we should be aware when assumptions are not grounded in verifiable fact.
I enter, as I tend to, not trying to defend this given law or whatever negligible policy or event is being whined about at high pitches, but to remove the discussion from the ditch in which it resides, unable to see the light of god.
The fact that there is a citation is in fact evidence that there's likely a fine, but whatevs, ya know. Surely you can assume your conclusion freely.
At the beginning of this thread malamute was claiming that this law only impacted illegals. It took multiple posts for people to understand that this was not the case, and that this was referring specifically to DUI checkpoints. And now, naturally, someone has hopped on ready to defend every assumption most favorable to their position that illegal immigrants are secretly running this nation from some sort of underground bunker while (accurately) pointing out that we should be aware when assumptions are not grounded in verifiable fact.
I enter, as I tend to, not trying to defend this given law or whatever negligible policy or event is being whined about at high pitches, but to remove the discussion from the ditch in which it resides, unable to see the light of god.
The law is being written to benefit illegals and illegals only. Only you seem to have a problem with understanding or admitting this. You, and you alone, also refuse to acknowledge that the net result of this law is to reduce the penalties for driving without licensure or insurance and thus make our roads less safe. The purpose of our laws should not be to make life easier for illegal aliens. If the net result of our laws is that illegals find it harder to work or get around: GREAT! Any low cost measures that encourage them to leave should be embraced.
I'm always amused at people who go and on about subtext yet can't seem to grasp it when it finally appears.
The law is being written to benefit illegals and illegals only. Only you seem to have a problem with understanding or admitting this.
No, I don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
You, and you alone, also refuse to acknowledge that the net result of this law is to reduce the penalties for driving without licensure or insurance and thus make our roads less safe.
The fact that there is a citation is in fact evidence that there's likely a fine, but whatevs, ya know. Surely you can assume your conclusion freely.
At the beginning of this thread malamute was claiming that this law only impacted illegals. It took multiple posts for people to understand that this was not the case, and that this was referring specifically to DUI checkpoints. And now, naturally, someone has hopped on ready to defend every assumption most favorable to their position that illegal immigrants are secretly running this nation from some sort of underground bunker while (accurately) pointing out that we should be aware when assumptions are not grounded in verifiable fact.
I enter, as I tend to, not trying to defend this given law or whatever negligible policy or event is being whined about at high pitches, but to remove the discussion from the ditch in which it resides, unable to see the light of god.
Apparently I missed the bolded comments. Please quote.
I prefer to wait until there is actual info indicating a specific fine. Of course, you are free to assume as you choose.
Please explain why you consider legitimate reservations to be a “ditch” level discussion.
Apparently I missed the bolded comments. Please quote.
I prefer to will wait until there is actual info indicating a specific fine. Of course, you are free to assume as you choose.
Please explain why you consider legitimate reservations to be a “ditch” level discussion.
Or why you believe posters here are unable to see the light of god? I wasn't aware that God was in favor of driving without licensure or insurance. Or that illegal supporters could sound just as nutty as Pat Robertson. What bizarrely arrogant phraseology!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
