https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/son-is-busted-for-drugs-but-its-mom-and-dad-who-lose-the-cars/

Well, there are situations like that, but a home is different from a car

The question before the court will be if such automatic seizures that then directly benefit local government should be protected from the Constitutional prohibition against disproportionate fines

Or whether this practice is unconstitutional based on the 8th

Well its definitely unconstitutional

Thst much I agree on

This topic is fascinating to me. What good would taking someone's property be if the person is already going to jail?

I don't understand the question.

There is no gain from taking the car away from someone who wasn't doing the crime aswell. Like the story of the parent care being taken awa

By taking their property, you have their assets and can use them for yourself.

But that doesn't make sense to me. Maybe you'll help. I don't see why the government should be allowed to take ones car away if the car won't even be used by the dealer once in jail anyway

It sorta makes the situation worse for the people around the crime

Like the parents

I suppose the argument would be "this person has gained these assets through criminal activity, and thus has no legitimate claim to them."

"They will instead be taken by the state and used for government assets."

Like, I don't think the government is allowed to take your car if you get arrested for assault.

That is the basic argument. The issue is the property may not even be owned by the guilty person and it creates a perverse incentive for local police departments to take property that they immediately benefit directly from.

That's the problem but what I want to know is what the logic behind taking ones property away from a criminal

The same issue arises with those civil forfeiture cases that we talked about earlier.

Right, I just explained it.

But what about the case of the car belonging to the parenta

That's Spanish for parents

It kinda means that any asset used for crime can be taken away, to who the asset actually belongs to be damn

Yes, civil asset forfeiture cases.

So not only could my car be taken away from the criminal it will be taken by the cops

To some extent, I can see the purpose of such activity. Regardless of your complicity with the crime, the property was involved, and is thus evidence in a criminal case.

However, yes, it should eventually be returned to the proper owner.

Is that reality though. Will certain property be returned?

I can see why a house will be given back but a car?

With civil forfeiture laws the property is never returned.

It's sold and the money goes into the local jurisdiction's coffers

where it gets handed out to the cops.

Well that fucking sucks. Kinda ruined my day

We will see what the Supremes have to say about it

@Bookworm in the case of attempted suicide, couldn't you strictly claim self defense, because the person you tried to kill was pointing a gun at you, for instance?

@DrYuriMom civil forfeiture laws are often used by corrupt cops to take property from things such as traffic stops. They will claim "this looks like drugs", take money and the like, then go "oh, our mistake" and never give back the money.

personally, those laws are BS and to an extent just contribute to recidivism rate.

The supremes? Aren't they backup singers?

I call SCOTUS "The Supremes" It's just a Cat-ism

@Timcast please don’t have Sargon on again he has falsely accused people of being pedophiles after the person made fun of sargon

@DrYuriMom i approve this catism