Homeowners Kicked Out Of House For Child's Drugs

Language: JP EN DE FR
New Items
2023-11-19
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Homeowners kicked out of house for child's drugs
Homeowners kicked out of house for child's drugs
First Page 2 3 4 5 6
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:07:55
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-07 22:16:54
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
I say, GOOD for the cops on this one. The parents "had no idea" of what their son was doing?! ***. Bull *** ***, "they didn't know"! It's your CHILD. Talk to the little ***, ASK him or her what they've been up to, maybe they'll be thankful you're taking an interest in their lives. You know what also takes people's homes and lives? PRISON. Prison time costs money. Seizing a house and putting it up for auction pumps money back into the government system. Especially if the former homeowner was obtaining their livelihood through illegal means.

This tells me all I need to know about you.....
[+]
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:21:41
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-07 22:29:52
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Millions of kids do things everyday that parents don't know about. Contrary to popular belief, there are kids that are stronger and smarter than adults. They can be conniving,deceitful, and down right more hateful than adults also.

Did your parents know everything you were into? I highly doubt it.....

I am sure that there are a ton of drugs that are sold and kept inside parents houses without their knowledge. Just the same way there are parties, sex, smoking, and drinking done inside ones home.

Here is another one, How is it a father can rape a daughter in a mothers home and the mother not know about it? It happens.

Even if they did know about it, I am sure most parents wont accept what the kid is doing. I am sure that they try to guide that child into making better decisions. Now lets say the kid does well for a while and then slips while still living in the parents house and gets caught. You think the parents still deserve to loose their home even while they were trying to help their child?!

Come on man..... You know this is wrong.
[+]
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:38:00
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-07 22:39:39
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Fumiku said: »
Come on man..... You know this is wrong.
Regardless of how wrong you, or I, or Joe Schmoe on the street might think it is, it's actually perfectly, 100% legal in Philadelphia, and in several other cities, states, and various parts of the country. Even if it wasn't, most cities and towns have laws regarding seizure via Eminent Domain. Here in CT, especially in Bridgeport, privately owned buildings end up seized through use of eminent domain all the time, mostly due to urban blight complaints, such as home A being known as a local drughouse or illegal dumping site.
How the average citizen feels about a given law won't change a goddamned thing. You want laws to change? Become a politician and change them.

Owning black people was legal, doesn't make it any less wrong.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-07 22:41:07
Link | Quote | Reply
 
At least in eminent domain, you are given cash value for your property! Here they just take what you have.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:42:07
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:43:11
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-07 22:44:16
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Fumiku said: »
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Fumiku said: »
Come on man..... You know this is wrong.
Regardless of how wrong you, or I, or Joe Schmoe on the street might think it is, it's actually perfectly, 100% legal in Philadelphia, and in several other cities, states, and various parts of the country. Even if it wasn't, most cities and towns have laws regarding seizure via Eminent Domain. Here in CT, especially in Bridgeport, privately owned buildings end up seized through use of eminent domain all the time, mostly due to urban blight complaints, such as home A being known as a local drughouse or illegal dumping site.
How the average citizen feels about a given law won't change a goddamned thing. You want laws to change? Become a politician and change them.

Owning black people was legal, doesn't make it any less wrong.
Slavery was abolished ages ago. However, while people might not be property anymore save in certain parts of the world, land and buildings still are considered as property. You can own a building. However, at any given time, the bank, the city, or the state, can revoke your right to own that building.

This is not even remotely the same, The state still has to give you current value for your property.

Unless they condemn the property, which is also wrong in my book unless it really should be condemned.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-07 22:49:53
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Offline
Posts: 42646
By Jetackuu 2014-09-07 23:56:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Don't bother arguing with the statist, he's pro fascism.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-09-08 00:10:43
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Unless the kid was CONVICTED of trafficking and there was a reasonable suspicion he'd reoffend, they have no cause to take the house other than to extort money from private citizens. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. The prosecutors need to be held to a higher level of ethics in general.
[+]
Offline
Posts: 42646
By Jetackuu 2014-09-08 00:12:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Unless the kid was CONVICTED of trafficking and there was a reasonable suspicion he'd reoffend, they have no cause to take the house other than to extort money from private citizens. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. The prosecutors need to be held to a higher level of ethics in general.

I've yet to meet an ethical prosecutor.
Offline
Posts: 729
By Fumiku 2014-09-08 00:55:45
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
I've gone over this multiple times with people in the past on here. They can take possession, via use of eminent domain, police seizure, or bank seizure, and place it up for auction. If the home is taken by way of police or bank forceful seizure or foreclosure, you won't "get cash value" for the home. The city or the bank retains that money. The money generated from auctioning the house off goes either:
A. Back to the city government, or...
B. Back to the bank.
From the link you provided in the OP of this thread Fumiku, this sounds like the cops are doing this with the permission of the banks. In which case, no. You won't get cash for the seized home, as it technically counts as forced foreclosure. The banks have to approve the seizure if one is to happen, and in many cities where this goes on, they sadly do so.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/981
It's a wall of text in that link, but here's the important part cut out for ease of digestion:
Quote:
(B) Any property, real or personal, within the jurisdiction of the United States, constituting, derived from, or traceable to, any proceeds obtained directly or indirectly from an offense against a foreign nation, or any property used to facilitate such an offense, if the offense
(i) involves trafficking in nuclear, chemical, biological, or radiological weapons technology or material, or the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance (as that term is defined for purposes of the Controlled Substances Act), or any other conduct described in section 1956 (c)(7)(B);
(ii) would be punishable within the jurisdiction of the foreign nation by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year; and
(iii) would be punishable under the laws of the United States by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, if the act or activity constituting the offense had occurred within the jurisdiction of the United States.
The kid's been dealing drugs, selling and distributing illegal controlled substances, out of that house. Therefore the city has a right to seize the house, as the house itself was being used to facilitate a legal offense, namely the trafficking of illegal, controlled substances.
Therefore, as I said before: It doesn't matter how wrong you or I think it is, or how extreme, say, someone like Kingnobody might think the reaction of the police in this case is, it's perfectly legal. The home was used for drug-related crimes, and was seized due to said drug-related crimes. The parents in this case don't have a leg to stand on if the case goes to trial.


I never said it wasn't legal, but legal doesn't mean right. I showed you many examples of things that go on in a parents house without their knowledge. You chose to go on an try to prove to me the legality of the issue and ignore how you feel about this subject morally. You stated that they are at fault and are horrible parents because they don't know what's going on in their kids life. Guess what, there are good parents out there with bad kids and they shouldn't be held responsible for their 22 year old children. You continue to ignore this

I don't give a flying rats *** if it's legal. That's not what your getting. It's not right and it's just a way for the government to earn more money by the millions!.

They weren't the ones committing the crime, the 22 year old son should be spending time in jail or rehabilitation and paying his debt to society not his parents.

Oh and by the way, he wasn't even in the house when he was arrested. So lets say he was on the neighbors property and was busted, should the neighbors lose their house? By your logic they should.
[+]
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-09-08 01:55:55
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Civil forfeiture is legal, but it can and has been abused.

Side tangent: And really legal means jack ***. Legal does not mean just, ethical, etc, it means according to some law makers something should be considered illegal or legal.

There are plenty of laws that should not be on the books or enforced, and there are some that haven't been written that should be enforced.

The law changes and adapts to society. If society does not accept or endorse a law, that law changes. Same with citizens calling for new laws.

Back to civil forfeiture. I've posted this article before
Taken
It's a long article, but well worth reading. First few paragraphs below
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-09-08 04:21:13
Link | Quote | Reply
 
There's obviously a lot missing from this story. I could only find it on CNN.

While the idea of having to prove your innocence is fundamentally wrong, it goes on all the time, especially in Pennsylvania.

Quote:
In Pennsylvania, the City of Brotherly Love is far and away the most aggressive in the state when it comes to people's property. Over a four-year period, Allegheny County, the second largest county in Pennsylvania, filed about 200 petitions for civil forfeiture. Philadelphia filed nearly 7,000 petitions in one year alone, according to the class action lawsuit, in which the Sourvelises are plaintiffs, along with other Philadelphia citizens.

Philadelphia officials seized more than 1,000 houses, about 3,300 vehicles and $44 million in cash, totaling $64 million in civil forfeitures over a 10-year period, according to the lawsuit.

The very authorities taking the property appear to be profiting from it, according to Pennsylvania state records. The Pennsylvania Attorney General's office says about $7 million went straight to the salaries for the Philadelphia District Attorney's office and the police department in just three years. In that same time period, records show the D.A.'s office spent no money on community-based drug and crime-fighting programs, according to the Philadelphia AG's office.

The Philadelphia District Attorney's office told CNN it seizes property only as a last resort, and added that it is limited in what it can currently say because of the pending litigation.

"In most cases the Public Nuisance Task Force doesn't pursue forfeiture because the underlying issue with the real estate is resolved when a settlement agreement is reached with the property owner in which he or she agrees to take reasonable efforts to prevent future narcotics dealing from the property."

The DA's office also says it works directly with citizens, the police, government agencies, and community groups in an effort to abate or close drug properties.

Civil forfeiture can be used on the federal or state level. Only eight states -- Maine, Maryland, Missouri, Indiana, Vermont, North Carolina, Ohio and North Dakota -- require seized funds be placed in a neutral account. Other states allow law enforcement to directly profit from the civil forfeitures or put proceeds into a special crime fighting fund.

In some states, like Pennsylvania, the burden is on the property owner to prove their innocence. The Sourvelises say they had to go to a courtroom and fight to get their home back where, instead of facing a judge, they faced a prosecutor from the DA's office.

There was no courtroom or judge, Christos Sourvelis says. "There's just one guy telling us to sign these papers. That's it."

After eight days of sleeping on a family member's couch, the Sourvelises were let back into their house, but only on the guarantee they would ban their son from the house -- a heartbreaking decision, they say. (Their son pleaded no contest to the drug charges.)
Parents' house seized after son's drug bust

Can't really comment more on this particular story, since the details are scarce. CNN is not mentioning the amount of drugs or value in this instance.

The only thing I can say for sure is that the whole innocent until proven guilty concept has become a farce.

If the state says you did something, and they have an officer of the law as their evidence, then you are forced to prove your innocence.
[+]
 Cerberus.Lynchilles
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: collapse
Posts: 49
By Cerberus.Lynchilles 2014-09-08 05:42:15
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I live two blocks away from this family. I can tell you with absolute certitude there is more going on than what CNN is reporting. It has been going on for years and everyone in our neighborhood knows it. PPD are using the son's latest indiscretions to finally try and shut it all down. PPD isn't going to make public what's going on until after the formal indictments since they can build some cases for additional arrests after the evidence is gathered from their home.
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-09-08 05:58:24
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cerberus.Lynchilles said: »
I live two blocks away from this family. I can tell you with absolute certitude there is more going on than what CNN is reporting. It has been going on for years and everyone in our neighborhood knows it. PPD are using the son's latest indiscretions to finally try and shut it all down. PPD isn't going to make public what's going on until after the formal indictments since they can build some cases for additional arrests after the evidence is gathered from their home.
After taking such a bold move and having this story make headlines (debatable as only CNN is reporting it in MSM), I would like to see exactly what the PPD has as evidence to search the home without an official warrant from a judge and resort to using civil forfeiture instead.
[+]
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 08:55:02
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 09:14:47
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-09-08 09:38:59
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Well then, I rest my case. The police were acting correctly in threatening to forcibly seize the house and kick the family out if the parents didn't do something about their child. Fortunately, they did. They kicked their son out onto the street to fend for himself.


An anonymous internet forum post is your bar of proof? Seriously, even if that person is telling the truth, it's an opinion, our judicial system is supposed to rely on evidence.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 09:49:16
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 10:02:13
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-09-08 10:07:53
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Fenrir.Candlejack said: »
Which would you rather have? A functioning drug house, or a well-funded and equipped police department?
I would like a well-funded and equipped police department that doesn't rely on civil forfeitures as a source of income.

If the Philadelphia Police Department has to rely on civil forfeitures, and not on tax revenue from the state or city for income, then there is something really wrong with the state legislation.
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-09-08 10:12:14
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I would have a sufficiently funded and unequipped police force. No assault weapons, no tanks, no "emphasis" patrols to "prove the need" for more jail space, no unlawful dui or immigration checkpoints, etc. The police have become a bloated fratboy militia, take away their toys and hold them accountable. Just like basically all government spending, they'd do better on less than half.
[+]
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2014-09-08 10:14:45
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Tough call... but that's not the choice presented.

Also, I don't think 'The Fix' has it's own reporters, especially since it's the same article by CNN and even quoted the CNN legal analyst.

Quote:
In that same time period, records show the D.A.'s office spent no money on community-based drug and crime-fighting programs, according to the Philadelphia AG's office.

So the real question is would you rather have a well funded DA and police that get paid (salaries only, not equipment for the force) with these forfeitures or have that money spent on community-based drug and crime-fighting programs?
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 10:15:01
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-09-08 10:16:21
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
I would have a sufficiently funded and unequipped police force. No assault weapons, no tanks, no "emphasis" patrols to "prove the need" for more jail space, no unlawful dui or immigration checkpoints, etc. The police have become a bloated fratboy militia, take away their toys and hold them accountable. Just like basically all government spending, they'd do better on less than half.
Wait, do the police force anywhere use tanks on a daily basis? Or assault rifles?

Plus, where are you getting these "unlawful DUI" or "immigration checkpoints (that is not being held or assisting the Immigration Department for the federal or state agencies)"?

The police forces are held more accountable than you think, its just that when 1 officer goes bad or rougerogue, you automatically assume that they are all bad or rouge rogue.

Edit: fixed spelling >.>
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2014-09-08 10:18:14
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Log in to post.