[ericabiz]

Although I don't agree with it, I am knowledgeable about the side in favor of civil forfeiture. (I grew up in Indiana, and my dad was an attorney there.)

The "other side" says: Seizing Land Rovers from drug dealers helps fund underfunded rural police departments, and keeps them from having to raise taxes on law-abiding citizens.

I have no doubt that every aspect of this viewpoint is debatable. However, that's the viewpoint, per your request.

[sjwright]

You could also charge a fee to everyone who calls 911.

Seriously though. The police are a service provider who are employed by and act on behalf of all citizens. If we want functioning law enforcement, we should be willing to pay for it.

We might not appreciate it on a daily basis, but functioning law enforcement saves individuals a lot of money. Imagine if they didn't exist and everyone had to to organise their own security.

[jessaustin]

Imagine if they didn't exist and everyone had to to organise their own security.

In many locations this is effectively the situation. Police show up after crimes are over. Sometimes they help the victims of crime, sometimes they don't. The crimes that police interrupt are largely the victimless ones; after all there is no victim to report the crime so if they want to prosecute they had better catch the accused in the act.

Somebody will say that this only appears to be the case because police have already put lots of criminals in prison. Since there are few criminals remaining, we don't have to worry so much about crimes happening now. I can't agree, at least in USA. Our prison population is 4-5 times what it should be. If they imprison multitudes, they don't get credit for the possibility that some of the imprisoned actually should be imprisoned.