429
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] echodot@feddit.uk 52 points 8 months ago

The law isn't hard to understand it's just hard to understand the specifics of. That's not quite the same thing.

I do not think anyone really believes that they are allowed to drive on a suspended license, they know they're not allowed to drive on the suspended license, but they are selfish and they do not care. They just think that there's some weird loophole that will allow them to get away with it.

The problem is, everything they think they know about the law comes from a facebook group of crazy people.

[-] urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone 36 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

But that’s the thing though: devil’s in the details. That’s why we hire lawyers. I mean, driving on a suspended license is illegal for everyone and it’s very obvious. Pretty much everyone gets the same ticket.

Just like stealing and embezzlement. Some guy at my work just got fired for that, and rightly so. He stole like, a hundred dollars worth of candy. They’re prosecuting him for it. Not sure why he did it, he was on camera taking an entire case, very silly stuff.

Too bad he didn’t steal 5.6 million dollars from 1,000 people. Then it would just be a civil case that takes 10+ years to litigate.

Edit: the dealers were actually seeking a combined 50 mil, and after legal fees (1.4 mil) and etc each got about 4K. Justice!

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 9 points 8 months ago

I suspect there's a group of sovcits (perhaps even the majority of them) who are assholes looking to shirk alimony or child support, or wanting to drive after their 5th DUI took their license.

But yeah, on the other hand, I get why some people are rightfully angry about corps and rich people getting away with murder, and so they do their own "research" on how to figure out the loopholes of things like making yourself into a corporation. Too bad the reality is the a) rich people do exist in a separate justice system and b) they're far too dumb to be able to make legal loopholes work for them. Plus most of those loopholes involve a ton of money in the first place (refer back to point a).

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Too bad he didn’t steal 5.6 million dollars from 1,000 people. Then it would just be a civil case that takes 10+ years to litigate.

It's not about how much you steal, it's about how expensive are the lawyers you can afford.

[-] Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

5.6 million dollars buys a lot more lawyers than a case of candy

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

If you rob a bank for $5.6m, and get caught, I'm pretty sure won't be allowed to use that money to pay a lawyer. Wynn Resorts needed to have enough funds for legal expenses even without the money in dispute.

[-] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

lawyers, like bankers, are the only winners in the game they play

this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
429 points (98.9% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

2575 readers
116 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS