Canadian Judge takes away boy's Wii ...

[DesignFox]

Well, Flyn, maybe you play video games. And therefore, in your household, it could be possible that the game console belonged to you, and the kid was just using it.

I think in this case, after re-reading and checking the other links, that it is fairly obvious the Grandmother isn't going to miss the Wii, if the kid breaks his parole and actually gets it taken away.

You confuse me sometimes. You have no problem slamming the sledgehammer of the law on a teenager who throws toilet paper into trees on mischief night, but you have a serious problem with a judge using a kid's Wii console as bond for breaking parole. When, I might add, he is a repeat offender and nothing else has seemed to work to rehabilitate him. The threat of losing his game might just make stay straight for the time being.

And it seems pretty clear in this case that the game belongs to him. Not anybody else.

[Flyndaran]

...
You confuse me sometimes. You have no problem slamming the sledgehammer of the law on a teenager who throws toilet paper into trees on mischief night, but you have a serious problem with a judge using a kid's Wii console as bond for breaking parole. When, I might add, he is a repeat offender and nothing else has seemed to work to rehabilitate him. The threat of losing his game might just make stay straight for the time being.

And it seems pretty clear in this case that the game belongs to him. Not anybody else.

I don't like judges getting overly creative. This idea fits with wanting underage criminals to face judgment by not overly creative judges.

Taking possessions is normally only allowed if the item in question was used to commit a crime. I don't like state sanctioned theft to punish criminals for other crimes.
Juvie or removal from inadequate parents seems more just that the justice system wasting its time acting as a parent.

[Boozy]

Taking possessions is normally only allowed if the item in question was used to commit a crime. I don't like state sanctioned theft to punish criminals for other crimes.

Are you purposefully ignoring my posts AND the actual story?

The court has not confiscated the Wii. It has been voluntarily put up as bond to keep the kid from breaking probation. If the child had refused to put up collateral, another solution would (presumably) have been found.

[Flyndaran]

Are you purposefully ignoring my posts AND the actual story?

The court has not confiscated the Wii. It has been voluntarily put up as bond to keep the kid from breaking probation. If the child had refused to put up collateral, another solution would (presumably) have been found.

I never read the article.
I assumed previous posters were clear about the taking of the item.
Sorry, I know not reading the story is a very bad habit.