Talk:Amercement
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Perhaps this belongs in Wiktionary. Edison 01:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- If it's good enough for EB, then its good enough for here. —Xezbeth 17:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Funny language
editAdorable, crispy, old-fashioned language abounds on Wikipedia English law articles. 178.38.88.9 (talk) 08:27, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Amercement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120514155810/http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/20070824_CRIA_Update.pdf to http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/20070824_CRIA_Update.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Modern usage (asset forfeiture)–especially Canadian/non-U.S.
editDoes the section on modern usage belong here? or would the article on Asset Forfeiture be a better fit? Specifically, as far as I can ascertain, the Canadian section (the only non-U.S. subsection for modern usage) covers similar ground as the U.S. section but there may not be any explicit reference in Canadian law to civil forfeiture as "amercement". But the article Asset Forfeiture seems to have the same focus with somewhat broader geographic coverage. --DanTrent (talk) 12:46, 30 May 2019 (UTC)