City moves to confiscate cars used in soliciting prostitutes (Los Angeles)

Modesto Bee ^ | 12/14/02 | AP

[hoosierskypilot]

LOS ANGELES(AP) - City leaders have a message for motorists caught soliciting prostitutes: Police will seize and sell your car.

In an ambitious effort to go after customers, the City Council gave initial approval to the law as a way to ease the problem plaguing a number of neighborhoods.

The proposed ordinance, endorsed by Police Chief William Bratton, is similar to ones in Stockton and Oakland. It could receive final approval on Tuesday.

"If you dry up the market, hopefully the prostitutes will go away," said police Capt. Michael Downing, commanding officer of the Hollywood Division, which accounted for 2,000 of the city's 3,100 prostitution arrests this year.

[hoosierskypilot]

What retards. Why don't they lock up the hookers? Forever? Another example of limp wristed CA politicians trying to treat a symptom of crime instead of dealing with criminals. (cf, gun control)

[Mulder]

Police will seize and sell your car.

Sounds more like armed robbery to me.

Police seizures have nothing to do with preventing crime, and everything to do with stealing the property of American citizens.

[ActionNewsBill]

City leaders have a message for motorists caught soliciting prostitutes: Police will seize and sell your car.

What happens when Dad uses Mom's car to visit a hooker? Does Mom's car get seized?

[LibWhacker]

Equal justice for all.
Yeah, right.

[B4Ranch]

Those who use hookers should just use rental cars.

[SolaScriptura]

"Proceeds from car sales would be divided between the Police Department and the city attorney's office."

This is the true reason behind the confiscations!

[billhilly]

You have explained the motive precisely. Government loves speeders. They are "addicted" to tobacco and alcohol. If you don't pay your parking ticket on time, that's just fine with them. They double the amount.

I have forgotten the rationale for parking meters. If you have a car or boat, or other personal property in most counties, you must pay the county for the privilege of owning and operating them.

It's ok, though. If you need the police they will be there when you need them. They will even ask you to voluntarily turn in your guns to them so they can sell them and make the streets "safe."

How would we do without them?

[babygene]

Or cabs.

[Thinkin' Gal]

Which Johns are more likely to be caught... the ones driving $600 vehicles, or the ones with $60,000 vehicles.

[LibWhacker]

It doesn't say whether or not you actually have to BE in your car at the time of the infraction in order for them to seize it. And if you do, it's a trivial step for the police state to take to change that "interpretation." :-(

[Fintan]

...everything to do with stealing the property of American citizens.

I was about to say this sounds a tad unconstitutional until I remembered what country I'm now living in and what part of this country this lunacy comes from...

[B4Ranch]

Which Johns are more likely to be be able to afford a hotel room... the ones driving $600 vehicles, or the ones with $60,000 vehicles.

[Fred Mertz]

I'll have to fire up my $450 jalopy next time.

[coloradan]

Why don't they lock up the hookers? Forever?

Sex, and business contracts between consenting adults. Which are you against?

[Enterprise]

I guess this will make the citizens of L.A. feel soooooo much safer. They have a record breaking homicide rate, and the gangs basically rule the city now. (Ok, a bit of hypebole.) The L.A. Police can't control violent crimes, and drugs. BUT! The CAN pick on hookers and their customers. COWARDS!

I still wonder how it is that in California, sex between consenting adults in legal, but if money is involved, that somehow makes it "illegal consenting."

[chitownman]

So Glad to see the LA police have their priorities in line.

Murder is put aside, while prostitution which is somehow considered worse a problem needs greater attention.

Let alone the fact that the law violates the US Constitution. This a pure theft scam by the LAPD.

Pathetic!

[Enterprise]

I have heard lawyers advance the view that confiscating vehicles before someone is convicted would violate the Constitution. The proof is going to be someone who has a vehicle confiscated and have the case go before the California Supreme Court, and possible the SCOTUS. There could be some sort of civil abatement reasoning, in that the customers and their vehicles contribute to a public nuisance, and that they only need a preponderance of evidence (50%) to prove in civil court that the vehicle should therefore be confiscated.

I would like to see proof that picking on prostitutes and their customers somehow makes the community safer. There is an enormous amount of death and disease being spread by gays. No one has the balls to try and stop them though. These operations are oppressive, cowardly, and are simply a different form of taxation, and they stink.

[Enterprise]

Sorry, preponderance of evidence - 51%

[dennisw]

It's all about grabbing $$$ from hapless schmucks!!! The deficit in Kalifornia is huge so how well can LA be doing?

[JavaTheHutt]

Police seizures have nothing to do with preventing crime, and everything to do with stealing the property of American citizens.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner! Now let's consult the Bill of Rights, and see what it has to say on the subject:

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

According to the California penal code:

647. Every person who commits any of the following acts is guilty of disorderly conduct, a misdemeanor:
(a) Who solicits anyone to engage in or who engages in lewd or dissolute conduct in any public place or in any place open to the public or exposed to public view.
(b) Who solicits or who agrees to engage in or who engages in any act of prostitution. A person agrees to engage in an act of prostitution when, with specific intent to so engage, he or she manifests an acceptance of an offer or solicitation to so engage, regardless of whether the offer or solicitation was made by a person who also possessed the specific intent to engage in prostitution. No agreement to engage in an act of prostitution shall constitute a violation of this subdivision unless some act, in addition to the agreement, is done within this state in furtherance of the commission of an act of prostitution by the person agreeing to engage in that act. As used in this subdivision, "prostitution" includes any lewd act between persons for money or other consideration.

It seems like seizing a person's car for a misdemeanor charge is excessive enough to be a violation of the Bill of Rights. How long is it gonna be before the city is paying out big bucks in a lawsuit for violating someone's rights?