Are you really arguing that the libertarian way is to consider laws optional?
There is no way he can legally use the vehicle on any UK roads, giving him it back, when he has already flagrantly violated the laws, is encouraging him to violate them some more.
Well that is not what you originally said and what I commented on. You advocated for confiscation and destruction of a legal product to own in the UK.
Fine the driver, jail the driver, do whatever the law requires when someone breaks a traffic law. Just owning that particular vehicle apparently is not a crime in the UK. Destroying the vehicle as a punitive measure is simply not appropriate. Would you confiscate and destroy the shoes of someone trespassing on a path?
From the article:
“Just because UK residents are allowed to purchase an imported Cybertruck doesn’t mean they can drive it on public roads. Choosing to take the risk opens them up to a police stop.”
>…laws optional?
When someone commits a traffic or road infraction in the UK is the response to confiscate their vehicle and demolish it? Probably not, I am not in the UK, but I am pretty sure that is not the penalty and never has been for road violations.
My guess is the driver is probably fined. If they are a repeat offender, likely a license to drive is taken away. Certainly if they drive after that, perhaps incarceration is considered. Not sure that there has never been a penalty where something akin to “smashing someone’s toys with a hammer to stop them playing with them” has ever been considered a reasonable penalty and effective deterrent.
But hey, maybe y’all have a different perspective. If so ah salud.