User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:38:00 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Civil asset forfeiture as currently practiced should be illegal. Assets should only be taken after a criminal conviction and then only for the value of the lawful fines/penalties imposed by law and/or the fair value of items stolen or destroyed by the convicted. If the crime harmed a citizen, all assets seized and fines/penalties should be given to that citizen or their family. Nothing in excess of that should be legal. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:44:05 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. We forfeit stuff all the time and have to establish a value. Guess GD wants the police to sell the 100 kilos of cocaine from last week's drug bust or just return it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:54:47 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread is not about criminal asset forfeiture. It's even in the title. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:55:43 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. We forfeit stuff all the time and have to establish a value. Guess GD wants the police to sell the 100 kilos of cocaine from last week's drug bust or just return it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:56:37 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When was the last time someone had 100k stolen from their house? I know this week that was taken out of a car in Kansas where both occupants denied ownership. Weird, why would they deny ownership.....  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 9:57:35 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread is not about criminal asset forfeiture. It's even in the title. If only GD would learn about the legal process. Weird that a court hearing where the government must prove a link to criminal activity is required is still inadequate. Not saying some places are criminal in what they do, but GD wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of addressing those doing it illegally, let's outlaw a perfectly legal effective practice. Nothing like punishing the masses to address the few screw-ups. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:00:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You do know who 99% of those assets are taken from right? I'll give you a hint, it's not from the people in the stories posted in GD that twist your panties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:01:20 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasn't our country founded on the principle that the government shouldn't be able to do this shit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:02:03 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You do know who 99% of those assets are taken from right? I'll give you a hint, it's not from the people in the stories posted in GD that twist your panties. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:02:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except we run it civil too. If only GD would learn about the legal process. Weird that a court hearing where the government must prove a link to criminal activity is required is still inadequate. Not saying some places are criminal in what they do, but GD wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of addressing those doing it illegally, let's outlaw a perfectly legal effective practice. Nothing like punishing the masses to address the few screw-ups. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:08:04 PM EDT
[#11]
So apparently crime DOES pay...for somebody.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:09:12 PM EDT
[#12]
I am considerably more afraid of organized government crime versus some disorganized criminal freelancer that breaks down the back door and steals an old HDTV or a laptop. I don't really have much to steal, just misc household junk.
OTOH, I've had almost 100K stolen from me by the local county gov over the 6 years of lawsuits in the "Family Court". To defend yourself, you need to hire a lawyer that charges $300/hour. Multiple that times 6 years and they will clean you out - take everything you have. On top of it, tens of thousands in "child support", $1500/month payments that the nut job ex uses against me by hiring expensive lawyers with my money. While my "child" goes hungry. But if I don't pay, the mafia throws me in jail. If I am out of work for 6 months and don't make payments for 6 months, they say it's "involuntary impoverishment" and I am in "arrears" and unless I pay about $9000, my DL will be suspended, followed by the US passport, followed by a jail sentence. I am not afraid of a junkie that breaks my car window and steals a player or something- I am afraid of organized crime. Mafia with a US flag in the corner. All for the children. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:11:37 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except we run it civil too. If only GD would learn about the legal process. Weird that a court hearing where the government must prove a link to criminal activity is required is still inadequate. Not saying some places are criminal in what they do, but GD wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of addressing those doing it illegally, let's outlaw a perfectly legal effective practice. Nothing like punishing the masses to address the few screw-ups. There is no requirement that the government prove a link to criminal activity. That's the problem. Are you sure you're thinking of civil forfeiture? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:13:00 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When was the last time someone had 100k stolen from their house? I know this week that was taken out of a car in Kansas where both occupants denied ownership. Weird, why would they deny ownership..... A practical tip from Boston's T Party book -- bolt or weld a safe to the trunk floor. Something heavy duty. Unless they can demo a reason to hold you, they won't open it that easily. As a real life example, a drug dealer was detained by the "law" could not open his safe in a reasonable amount of time and had to let him go. Carrying guns, large amounts of FRNs, anything of value at all in a car is downright stupid. Hint #2 If you must carry cash, request all new bills from the bank. They come with consecutive serial numbers. So obviously came from the same place. I have no idea if it's any proof that it came from a good source but seems like if you get a receipt you made a withdrawal from a bank, should help your case. $100s are harder to find new but $10 much easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:14:39 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Get stopped with 100k in cash on a highway (that you legally obtained), and get back to me on how you feel about how the courts (and costs, deprivation of your funds) providing due process to you. It's not the law that's the problem, it's the degree to which it is applied and the presumption that merely possessing something means you likely didn't get it legally (even though there are many people in this nation that have enough money that transporting 100k in cash could happen. If I traveled with that kind of amount, I would convert it all to gold or maybe platinum coins. They look sort of collectible and rare, though of course they are not and might be less likely to be confiscated. Of course this does not address the root of the problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:17:28 PM EDT
[#16]
We've managed to find the one thing that the government does better than the private sector.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:26:57 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We've managed to find the one thing that the government does better than the private sector. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:45:00 PM EDT
[#18]
Just another violent criminal gang, doing what criminals do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:48:14 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Civil forfeiture should be stricken from the books. This wouldn't affect your actions at all, you could still seize contraband as criminal forfeiture. You just wouldn't be able to steal money from people who did nothing wrong. There is no requirement that the government prove a link to criminal activity. That's the problem. Are you sure you're thinking of civil forfeiture? What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 10:52:34 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People who did nothing wrong? Hmm.. Ok. What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. TX has a problem with some depts seizing assets (even pocket money and jewelry) on the side of the road and making people sign them over or be arrested. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:00:36 PM EDT
[#21]
Letters of Marque, 21st century style.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:02:04 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People who did nothing wrong? Hmm.. Ok. What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:11:02 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People who did nothing wrong? Hmm.. Ok. What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Civil forfeiture should be stricken from the books. This wouldn't affect your actions at all, you could still seize contraband as criminal forfeiture. You just wouldn't be able to steal money from people who did nothing wrong. There is no requirement that the government prove a link to criminal activity. That's the problem. Are you sure you're thinking of civil forfeiture? What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. But I'm pretty sure every state has problems with "I'll be taking that, you can challenge it in court if you can afford a lawyer now that we have your money". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:15:49 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What did that just say?? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Except we run it civil too. If only GD would learn about the legal process. Weird that a court hearing where the government must prove a link to criminal activity is required is still inadequate. Not saying some places are criminal in what they do, but GD wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of addressing those doing it illegally, let's outlaw a perfectly legal effective practice. Nothing like punishing the masses to address the few screw-ups. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:17:54 PM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:20:02 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The truth. Even criminal cases seize it through civil court. All seizures/forfeiture are civil Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Except we run it civil too. If only GD would learn about the legal process. Weird that a court hearing where the government must prove a link to criminal activity is required is still inadequate. Not saying some places are criminal in what they do, but GD wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Instead of addressing those doing it illegally, let's outlaw a perfectly legal effective practice. Nothing like punishing the masses to address the few screw-ups. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:22:11 PM EDT
[#27]
to-may-to / to-mah-to
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:34:43 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
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. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
First time in recorded history, police seized more money and property through asset forfeiture than all burglars and thieves combined. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-11-17/police-civil-asset-forfeitures-exceed-value-all-burglaries-2014 Between 1989 and 2010, U.S. attorneys seized an estimated $12.6 billion in asset forfeiture cases. The growth rate during that time averaged +19.4% annually. In 2010 alone, the value of assets seized grew by +52.8% from 2009 and was six times greater than the total for 1989. Then by 2014, that number had ballooned to roughly $4.5 billion for the year, making this 35% of the entire number of assets collected from 1989 to 2010 in a single year. Now, according to the FBI, the total amount of goods stolen by criminals in 2014 burglary offenses suffered an estimated $3.9 billion in property losses. This means that the police are now taking more assets than the criminals. 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. I don't think anyone thinks the issue is criminal asset forfeiture, that is correct and is applied under due process. The issue is civil asset forfeiture where someone accused of no crime and is only "guilty" of possession of cash. The cash (property) is taken and the citizen has to prove that they were in possession of it by lawful means. How this is done in my great state of Texas is that they charge the money civilly, not the person criminally. This practice is un-American and evil and runs counter to the presumption of innocence. This thread has nothing to do with individuals who are convicted of a crime and forfeit the gains from that crime, that is covered under due process. I said this twice because we have LEO that are commenting on this thread who do not understand the nuance between the due process of criminal asset forfeiture and the highway robbery some of their brethren commit under civil asset forfeiture. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/29/2017 11:45:07 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People who did nothing wrong? Hmm.. Ok. What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. They never showed a link to criminal activity. They never even alleged a crime. She still didn't get her money back. How do we keep having this fucking discussion? This keeps coming up, this gets demonstrated, we look away for a few minutes, and when we look back, cops are back saying "It has to be related to a crime" as if maybe everyone forgot? Seriously, stop this. If you truly think a link to crime has to be present to justify a seizure, then you should agree with us that civil asset forfeiture needs major fixing. Otherwise, you can just come out and say you're okay with governments essentially stealing from the people instead of dancing around pretending it doesn't work that way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 12:46:40 AM EDT
[#30]
Practiced on the little people, but never Hitlery who had pay to play. Other politicians also want "donations" before they vote for bills.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 12:51:15 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they are taking assets from criminals and criminals are taking assets from the innocent does that mean the cops are taking from the innocents?   Here's an example of what I'm talking about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:01:38 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In this thread most of GD explains that they know jack shit about asset forfeiture. Well he doesn't work here any more and the Sherrif lost the election because of his involvement and the law suits and people getting their belongings back after having to fight for it. Same cop, I told him I had a security camera on my front door and was going to get some more. He looked at me and said well that would make me look suspicious and why do I need all of them. Thing is , I bought them because OF the police. No kidding. I've read articles pertaining to how all 50 states have their own form of this. And how many places abuse the law. To much power for a human that can hide criminal conduct behind his badge. A thief is a thief. And if you screw up one time and take from an innocent party because of an assumption , society would now have a new predator to be mindful to watch for. And to me thief with a badge is worse than any other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:07:18 AM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:07:45 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread is not about criminal asset forfeiture. It's even in the title. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yep. We forfeit stuff all the time and have to establish a value. Guess GD wants the police to sell the 100 kilos of cocaine from last week's drug bust or just return it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:22:57 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People who did nothing wrong? Hmm.. Ok. What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Civil forfeiture should be stricken from the books. This wouldn't affect your actions at all, you could still seize contraband as criminal forfeiture. You just wouldn't be able to steal money from people who did nothing wrong. There is no requirement that the government prove a link to criminal activity. That's the problem. Are you sure you're thinking of civil forfeiture? What state are you in? I will look up your civil forfeiture laws to help you out. We MUST show a link to criminal activity, which must meet the courts requirements of preponderance of evidence that the item to be forfeited was used in or a product of the illegal activity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:26:53 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is criminal asset forfeiture? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yep. We forfeit stuff all the time and have to establish a value. Guess GD wants the police to sell the 100 kilos of cocaine from last week's drug bust or just return it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:36:38 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Asset forfeiture that follows a criminal conviction. Are you being intentionally dense about the semantics, or did you not know there were different laws covering the two scenarios, or were you setting up to make a different point? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yep. We forfeit stuff all the time and have to establish a value. Guess GD wants the police to sell the 100 kilos of cocaine from last week's drug bust or just return it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:56:53 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're both very mistaken. No trace of drugs in vehicle or on the person , just cash. And they were then told they were free to go. Many cases of the same, just a suspicion. States vary in how they do it though. But it has been done on an officers police skills in suspicion alone. And much of that money is not worth fighting for due to the cost of Atty fees, not that they were guilty of anything. When these laws were created they gave to much credit to all officers credibility and the door was open for a nefarious use of it by a lawman. And innocent peoples lives have been affected. I totally understand when used for a purpose of I'll gotten wealth of a criminal that is prosecuted with evidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 2:11:57 AM EDT
[#39]
You have $50k in cash you just took out of the bank to buy that new truck you've been saving for, for the last 5yrs. You get pulled over for speeding and during that interaction the police find out about your cash. They somehow decide that you've obtained that cash illegally and they seize it. No, you are not charged with a crime.
What sort of process do you need to go through to get your cash back? This is the complicated maze you will need to follow, and you will find resistance the entire way, guaranteed. Good luck! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 2:26:20 AM EDT
[#40]
In related news The dEA has confiscated 4 billions worth of property, 3.2 billion dollars worth of seized assets were unconnected to criminal charges.
http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/29/the-dea-seized-4-billion-from-people-sin DEA Seized $4 Billion From People Since 2007. Most Were Never Charged with a Crime A new government watchdog report finds the DEA grabs cash just for the sake of grabbing cash, raising civil liberties concerns. C.J. Ciaramella|Mar. 29, 2017 3:20 pm The Drug Enforcement Administration seized more than $4 billion in cash from people suspected of drug activity over the last decade, but $3.2 billion of those seizures were never connected to any criminal charges. A report by the Justice Department Inspector General released Wednesday found that the DEA's gargantuan amount of cash seizures often didn't relate to any ongoing criminal investigations, and 82 percent of seizures it reviewed ended up being settled administratively—that is, without any judicial review—raising civil liberties concerns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 3:15:19 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasn't our country founded on the principle that the government shouldn't be able to do this shit? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 3:32:33 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not being dense. I don't know what you are talking about. All asset forfeiture I have ever seen is civil. I can't think of a scenario where it would be criminal. Before that, there was still forfeiture, it just had real requirements for proving criminal involvement. The government could, once someone had been convicted of a crime, seize the proceeds of that crime (and sometimes return it to who it was stolen from). Now, they don't have to do that anymore. They can seize cash and claim it was suspicious, even when there's no specific evidence of a crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 5:04:14 AM EDT
[#43]
Libertarians are so often associated with being pro drug legalization. They are actually opposed to the fake " war on drug". Not that they want everyone to be dopers but the drug laws are used as a tool to seize property.
The ownership of real property was sacred to our Founding Fathers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 5:45:57 AM EDT
[#44]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 5:51:06 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
but that IS the penalty imposed by law Hmm maybe it's because I obey laws and shit? Yu guys worried about losing stuff should try it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 5:56:02 AM EDT
[#46]
There was a doctor (some Middle Eastern guy) not far from here about five or ten years ago who was basically running a sham "pain clinic" where he would hand out prescriptions like candy for whatever kind of happy pills people wanted, and he would bilk Medicaid for much of it. Word of mouth spread among addicts and they were driving from hundreds of miles away for "appointments" with him, and in many cases, he was not even examining these patients (sometimes never even setting eyes on them) before writing them prescriptions for opioids.
According to the news stories, this apparently went on for quite some time, and then, the man dropped the hammer on him. His office was raided by the State Police and Federal agents from the DEA and the FBI, and his license to practice was suspended pending a host of federal charges. I think he went to the federal slam for the Medicaid billing fraud, but I don't remember exactly. I do know, however, that his mansion, his luxury automobiles, his yacht, an airplane that he owned, and all of the contents of his bank accounts now belong to the feds, so there's that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 6:10:47 AM EDT
[#47]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 10:41:11 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've never had to forfeit anything to the police. Hmm maybe it's because I obey laws and shit? Yu guys worried about losing stuff should try it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
but that IS the penalty imposed by law Hmm maybe it's because I obey laws and shit? Yu guys worried about losing stuff should try it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:45:50 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've never had to forfeit anything to the police. Hmm maybe it's because I obey laws and shit? Yu guys worried about losing stuff should try it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2017 1:51:14 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've never had to forfeit anything to the police. Hmm maybe it's because I obey laws and shit? Yu guys worried about losing stuff should try it. They target the innocent, they readily admit it and are proud of it. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
