No to Denver's Initiative 300

Sent in by Justin Longo

So you get out of your car, walk into the grocery store to pick up the dozen eggs you need to make that delicious omelette you've been craving all day, and when reach for your wallet to pay you realize... it's still on your kitchen counter.  Sound familiar?  We've all been there.  Every couple of months, I'll leave my house and drive an entire day with my wallet still sitting on the kitchen counter.  And fortunately for us forgetful people, we've been able to explain the situation to the officer if we got pulled over, and face a minor additional penalty. 

 

Denver's Initiative 300 could change all that.  This November, voters in Denver will decide whether to leave towing and car impound up to the police officer's discretion, or whether to mandate that all officers impound cars driven by unlicensed drivers - no matter the circumstances.  Forgot your wallet on the nightstand next to your bed?  Doesn't matter.  Owner of the car in the backseat while you drove unlicensed?  Doesn't matter.  The officer will have no choice but to impound the car and force the owner to pay an unreasonable amount (more than $2,700?!!) to get the car back.  Meanwhile, the officer is left waiting for a tow truck and not attending to more pressing duties - like catching criminals. 

 

It appears as though the backers of Initiative 300 wish for their ballot measure to curb illegal immigration in some manner.  Should Denver police officers be playing immigration official with their time?  Don't they have enough real police work to do already?  Furthermore, last year Denver voters passed Initiative 100 in order to give police officers precisely the discretion that Initiative 300 wishes to take away!  

 

The Libertarian Party of Colorado hopes voters in Denver will continue to allow police officer's to decide what to do when faced with an unlicensed driver.  Here are some resources for more information on the subject:

 

-Official VoteNoOnImpound.com website.

-ACLU's write-up of Initiative 300.

-Denver Post's editorial against the initiative.

 

Finally, if you haven't already, look me up and follow me on Twitter @LPCOLegislative!

 

That's all for now,

 

Justin Longo

Legislative Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado

"Whoever wishes peace among peoples must fight statism." -Mises

Comments

[LiveFreeCO]

Justin, I'm against this legislation.

It says if you don't physically possess you driver's license but can prove your identity, they can let you go with a ticket. What I find strange is that many officers have computers in their vehicles and can see your DMV photo. Why the hang up?

Let's keep this at officer's discretion.

[Adam]

You are reaching pretty far with your example. Serious, how many people get pulled over by an officer AND happen to have forgotten their license on the kitchen counter that morning? I am guessing that is such a rare occurence that it isn't even worth considering in this debate.

People who aren't licensed to drive should not be allowed to drive. Plain and simple. Unfortunately the only way for this to be enforced is usually AFTER someone is stopped for causing an accident.

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000196968339]

I've gotta go with Adam on this one. The odds of one doing something stupid, in front of a cop, without one's license is small enough. The likelihood that the cop will accept the DMV photo in his car as your valid ID is at least notable. If you fail all of those, then yes, you have to go through a little hassle to get your car back.

[Curtis]

I'm a Denver Cop, and I can tell you from experience...If my MDT (car Computer) tells me that you have a valid drivers license, I'm not writing the ticket. I'm not towing the car. People driving with suspended licenses are dangerous, people driving without insurance are breaking the law and by deffinition are criminals. Stop making excuses for these people. They occupy a huge amount of my time simply because they are not dealt with efficiently. Allow me to take away the vehicle of their crimes and disuade them from driving, and causing more problems.

[Thor Odinson]

Former Lakewood LEO (law enforcement officer). Can't vote this down but anybody that can--should. Worked in two states for three departments. This is not law enforcement--it's another reason to avoid Denver and never lend my car to them if they are going there. I've stopped people without a DL on them. It is a seperate offense if a cop wants to be a complete jerk so I call in their name and find they are valid, no wants, no warrants. Maybe a citation, a verbal warning about not carrying the DL and get back on patrol (busting a stickup, burglar or rapist--not some dumb "improper lane change")
Too bad Denver merchants you lose and Hick's parking meters go dry--so lay off some more LEO's? Idiots!!

[Donna Chaney]

In January 2006, my mom and dad were victims in a car wreck that was caused by a uninsured, unlicensed, undocumented female driver.
My mother spent 2 months in hospital and rehab and to this day she is severely disabled. Who paid for that? My dad's car was totaled. Who paid for that? My mom's and dad's lives have been forever changed by one careless person Who paid for that?

I believe that enormous numbers of the unlicensed drivers are also uninsured, and they need to start paying for something.

The Lakewood Police Department, by the way, let this unlicensed, uninsured, undocumented woman drive away with only a summons to appear in court.

I am saying YES to I-300.

[jesssica]

it is a neccesity to drive people have things to do dont take that privilage away from them plus you dont need to have a licence to have insurance if all of you are just worried about who is going to pay for your car if you get involved in a car wreck than requiere averyone to have insurance not license