We have had a thread or two regarding incidents of this nature, one of which is going strong, the other of which got locked due unnecessary cop-bashing.  Let's not let that happen here, this subject rests above the ground level officer's heads, and needs to be addressed as such.

In short, Arfcom, what say ye?

Argument 1: Suspicious activities are enough.  It is OBVIOUS that large amounts of cash unaccountable for are involved in dealings that are shady and probably illegal.  There are some very, very DEFINITE patterns of behavior regarding the transportation of cash and the accountablity of same, or lack of accountablity, that point to an undeniable situation of illegality.  Given the nature of things, be it for the prevention of terrorism or the prevention of drug abuse, it is within the rights of the citizenry, that being our police forces who we have put in charge, to seize monies involved in suspicious activity and put the onus of proof on the person seized from to prove the legitimacy of the money.

Argument 2: We are a nation of laws, and of fair play.  Supposedly, in our criminal justice system, one is innocent until proven guilty.  In a misguided effort to stave off drug related crime some time ago, we allowed FAR too much power to be usurped by local, state and federal government as concerns property and cash seizure/forfeiture, and it has been documentably proven to be vastly abused in the name of lining the coffers of local, state and federal law enforcement agencies.  In fact, in many cases, it is never even an option to be taken into a court of law, if a certain level of evidence, and it's a very subjective level, exists to be used against the person, cash and or property is simply seized with no due recourse.  Once again, this is documented and provable.
www.nacdl.org/TESTIFY/test0003.htm
This is wrong, counter to what we as a country are supposed to believe in and should be stopped.  Remember, *all* pertinent arguments put forth to support seizure/forfetiture could be, and already are being, used to support further restrictions on firearm ownership.

There are two poll options, there really are only two ways to think about this.  I have voted for option #2.  I am positively sickened by our abuses of power.  'Nuff said, discuss.