you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 3 years ago (133 children)

In Denmark we have the lovely new law that if you drive more than 100% over the speed limit and over 100 kmh or drive over 200 kmh at all or drunk driving with over 2‰ they confiscate the car and you are not getting it back at all. They confiscate the car regadles of who owns the car (with very few exceptions) and that is also if it is leased. So far since when the law started they have confiscated over 2000 cars in two years. It's my favourite law of all laws right now. The fine for driving crazy is also nicely proportional to your income and it removes the car so the person cannot just drive without license afterwards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 133 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (52 children)

    I can't get behind property seizure without compensation, but I can understand everything else.

    Even if they said "you can't have this car any more, but can sell it from our facility" that'd be better I think

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (16 children)

    In effect, is it really that different to a fine? It seems to have a couple of advantages, though: it's easier to collect, and it's proportional, so a person who can afford a fancy luxury car pays more than someone in an old banger, without the complexity of having to evaluate their income and savings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (15 children)

    This is exactly the reason they are doing it. Proportional to income and the car is completely and physically removed from the road. There was a big issue here where the offender would just drive without license or the car was leased or borrowed so there was no real penalty. Now the leasing company would have to take responsibility for leasing fancy supercars to anyone and everyone and people lending their car to a known drunk or fast driver would definitely think twice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (14 children)

    @TDCN

    That part is all good. The problem is they don't care whose car it is. If I was to borrow your car, and then break this law, then YOU are out a car. Yes, you can try and get the money back from me, but that might take a decade if I don't have money to replace your car.
    If you ask me, that's crazy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (12 children)

    Well I agree it might be a bit crazy, but I also must admit that I like the law because it works and it makes it such that I don't want to lend my car out to anyone unless I know for sure how they drive by driving with them a few times. It puts the responsibility into the hands of the car owner. Just replace the word car with gun and it all sounds reasonable. If I just lend my gun to a friend who I only know very little or I have never seen hold a gun in his hand that would be very bad. Even if he has a license for guns. And if he shot someone or broke the law in other ways with the gun I'd only expect the gun to be confiscated regardless of who owns it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (9 children)

    @TDCN @joland replacing car with gun or riffle makes it even more absurd. You saying that if I lend a riffle to someone on a hunt, I should bear the consequences for their actions if they miss and hit something? Thankfully the law in rest of Scandinavia isn’t as insane…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (8 children)

    There's a significant difference between an accident and deliberately being wrekless

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (7 children)

    @TDCN There is nothing about being “wreckless” when borrowing something to someone else. If person has a valid driving license that is all that matters. We ain’t even taking about lending a car to a obviously drunk idiot which is punishable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (15 children)

    @GBU_28 play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Driving a car is not a right. Especially in Denmark where public transport is an perfectly viable alternative for most of the population.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • load more comments (14 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)

    @TDCN @Showroom7561 During my holiday in DK I already noticed speeding is not really a thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    @TDCN @Showroom7561 I'll be honest I think it's an an odd stance to take to say confiscation is wrong. The 100 kmh limit is about 60 mph, to be over 100% that means the limit is 30 mph. This limit is normally through a town, village or urban area. So if someone drives at 60 mph down the high street, that's not just a "little bit of speeding", that's completely reckless

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (71 replies)