I have seen a lot of tesla vandalism online the last few days and I’m kind of on the fence about it.
I’ve seen several examples locally here in BC, Canada.
I think totally warranted at newly purchased teslas going forward. Also it serves as a deterrent for potential future buyers.
But vandalizing a car that is a few years old I think is lame. Those driversare already being punished enough by driving something around that’s worth less than scrap.
Writing in dirt is just not vandalism.
You insisting otherwise makes it seem like you might not be asking this question in good faith.
Y’all act like OP wrote the damn laws.
In many places, “writing” with the dust on a car is legally considered vandalism. It doesn’t matter how temporary it is, or if it washes off with a stiff breeze or a light rain. Here in Texas, it’d fall under criminal mischief for “intentionally or knowingly makes markings, including inscriptions, slogans, drawings, or paintings, on the tangible property of the owner”. Whether or not a court will spend the time hearing such a case is another story, but it’s technically illegal, as the laws are written.
What law is that exactly? Does it actually get enforced?
[…]
Lots of random bullshit could get you charged with “criminal mischief” if the cop is feeling like being a dick.
That’s not vandalism nor is there any proof anyone has ever been charged for it (never mind successfully prosecuted).
Show me the law specifically, as far as I am aware, no such law exists in any state.
Sure, some badge heavy cop could find a bullshit charge they claim fits, but that isn’t the same thing, not even close.
Criminal. Mischief. Third time I’ve said it. Go read.
It is vandalism. Once again, “vandalism” has nothing to do with permanence. And whether or not somebody is charged does not change whether or not it’s illegal, even though people pick up graffiti charges for sidewalk chalk all the time.
It is literally vandalism. I didn’t write the law. Lol
What law? Where? Has it ever been successfully enforced?
It is not. Writing “wash me” is not vandalism. This is not vandalism. Outside of the courtroom, reality is more important than a legal definition.
Moreover, legal definitions are irrelevant to whether an act is moral. Your fixation on this point in the face of so many people highlighting that no harm has been done again suggests you’re not arguing in good faith.