[X86BSD]

Yeah I think most states are like that now. Here in Kansas I think that's how they roll as well. Doesn't matter who did what ONE of you is going to jail. Cops don't give a shit. "We're just doing our jobs and the law says...."

Police discretion be damned.

[kbenson]

> Police discretion be damned.

That's the problem, as a mandatory law, there is no discretion, which makes the legal system too inflexible to be just. The problem with civil forfeiture is the opposite, as there is too much discretion, which allows it to be abused and used unjustly.

[X86BSD]

Agreed. But again I say produce a victim or there is no crime. What individual is the victim in civil forfeiture? No one but the owner of the property in question. That individual is the one harmed by the state. And should have redress for the states theft of his/her property. CF my $50,000 in gold bars? I'll sue for the return of my property AND ten million in damages. No cap in damages. Make the state bleed. CF is a crime.

[kbenson]

> But again I say produce a victim or there is no crime.

To all laws are criminal, and not all crimes have a singular, discrete victim. Laws are also used as disincentives.

> CF is a crime.

CF is used in a lot more instances than the simplistic example you are putting forth. For example, CF is what is used to justify seizure of contraband at the border (imagine a shipping container full of guns with no known owner). Grouping all usages under a simplistic, unrealistic reading of the law doesn't lead anywhere useful.

[justinclift]

> "imagine a shipping container full of guns with no known owner"

Assume CIA? :D