The Law:

While the law seems clear, it does involve that the rules are actually followed, and enforced.

• Driving a motor vehicle is a privilege, not a right (14607.4 VC)
• A license is required to drive a vehicle (12500(a) VC)
• The owner of a vehicle must determine that the operator possesses a license (14604(a) VC)
• The owner must authorize the person to operate the vehicle (14604(a) VC)
• An employer is required to verify a driver license, class, and in some cases a medical certificate for employees driving a motor vehicle (14606 VC)
• Impounding vehicles of suspended or unlicensed drivers is mandatory (14602.6(a)(1) VC)

California Legislative Findings:
14607.4 VC The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

• (a) Driving a motor vehicle on the public streets and highways is a privilege, not a right.
• (b) Of all drivers involved in fatal accidents, more than 20 percent are not licensed to drive. A driver with a suspended license is four times as likely to be involved in a fatal accident as a properly licensed driver.
• (c) At any given time, it is estimated by the Department of Motor Vehicles that of some 20 million driver's licenses issued to Californians, 720,000 are suspended or revoked. Furthermore, 1,000,000 persons are estimated to be driving without ever having been licensed at all.
• (d) Over 4,000 persons are killed in traffic accidents in California annually, and another 330,000 persons suffer injuries.
• (e) Californians who comply with the law are frequently victims of traffic accidents caused by unlicensed drivers. These innocent victims suffer considerable pain and property loss at the hands of people who flaunt the law. The Department of Motor Vehicles estimates that 75 percent of all drivers whose driving privilege has been withdrawn continue to drive regardless of the law.
• (f) It is necessary and appropriate to take additional steps to prevent unlicensed drivers from driving, including the civil forfeiture of vehicles used by unlicensed drivers. The state has a critical interest in enforcing its traffic laws and in keeping unlicensed drivers from illegally driving. Seizing the vehicles used by unlicensed drivers serves a significant governmental and public interest, namely the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of Californians from the harm of unlicensed drivers, who are involved in a disproportionate number of traffic incidents, and the avoidance of the associated destruction and damage to lives and property.
• (g) The Safe Streets Act of 1994 is consistent with the due process requirements of the United States Constitution and the holding of the Supreme Court of the United States in Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co., 40 L. Ed. 2d 452.

The California Government Code (GC 815.6) Says The City Is Liable for Injury:
"Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the public entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable diligence to discharge the duty."

The Los Angeles District Attorney, Steve Cooley says Beck is Wrong:    read the letter
"...such policies are contrary to state law and likely would create risks to public safety and public treasuries"

The Office of Legislative Counsel Says Beck Is Wrong on Impound Policy Change:    read the opinion
In a seven-page opinion provided to state Senator Bill Emmerson, the California Legislative Counsel opinion was very clear. Unlicensed driving is a crime in California and Vehicle Code Section 14602.6, which calls for vehicles to be impounded for up to 30 days, is part of the penalty structure the state legislature established for punishment of unlicensed driving. The opinion holds that law enforcement's job is to initiate the criminal process, not determine the application of penalty or consequences to the violator, before initiation of enforcement action.