The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: ABX on December 22, 2016, 07:22:06 pm
-
Limited government, Constitutional Conservatives should be standing up against civil asset forfeiture, not promoting it.
Imagine if police could seize your property without charging you with a crime. That might sound crazy, but in most of the country it’s perfectly legal. It’s called civil asset forfeiture, and it’s a nightmare that many innocent Americans have had to deal with......
...Unfortunately, President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for attorney general does not support reforming forfeiture laws. Jeff Sessions, who once said “good people don’t smoke marijuana,” has been a strong supporter of the forfeiture status quo.....
http://rare.us/story/jeff-sessions-thinks-police-should-be-able-to-steal-your-property-without-charging-you-with-a-crime/
-
Lots of reform on civil asset forfeiture in Michigan in recent years
-
Lots of reform on civil asset forfeiture in Michigan in recent years
We had a case a few years ago where a young man, 18-19, was stopped with $30K in cash (I may have the number wrong but it was around that amount). The police seized the cash because they suspected it was involved in drug crimes- no evidence mind you other than it was a lot of money and their bias led them to believe a young man would not have that type of money.
The cash was actually to take to the auto-auction in Shreveport to buy cars for his grandfather's used car lot that he was giving to his grandson (or something like that) and cash transactions are normal for small town used car lots.
It took him about 6 months and thousands of dollars in legal fees to get his money back.
He was never charged or even suspected of a crime, no investigation on the police's part, nothing on his record, but it didn't matter.
Other cases recently were worse. In NY a few years ago, police were stopping people on the street, taking expensive watches and even smaller amounts of cash all using the civil asset forfeiture excuse.
-
Limited government, Constitutional Conservatives should be standing up against civil asset forfeiture, not promoting it.
This is one of the reasons why I thought Giuliani was a bad choice. Now you are telling me that Sessions is actually a kind of bum also. Oh great.
I know, Levin says Sessions is a good choice, but the property forfeiture law is flagrantly unconstitutional.
-
I know, Levin says Sessions is a good choice, but the property forfeiture law is flagrantly unconstitutional.
It definitely is.
-
I have a friend who works 10 and 12 hours 6 and 7 days per week on a good paying job. He lived in the house his parents left to him and didn't do much other than work. He didn't love banks so he just stashed his money around the house.
One day he realized that he had upwards of $250,000 stashed around his house and decided that the bank might be safer. Within 24 hours of opening an account and depositing the money the feds had seized it. They interrogated him for hours despite him having all of his pay stubs going back several years.
It took several months for him to get his money back and the feds imposed some kind of tax penalty on him. His attorney explained that the penalty was basically because the feds were pissed off that he had "hoarded" money and effectively removed it from circulation and he wasn't reporting it. He was paying his taxes but much of his earnings never went any further than his pocket.
-
The GOP will have the power to do something about it coming up. Even liberals don't like CAF, so there's no excuse for not getting rid of it.
-
I always thought Sessions was garbage. This just proves my point.
-
I always thought Sessions was garbage. This just proves my point.
I almost said Session is garbage based on his abominable CAF position alone, but for some reason I stopped short. I guess I'm just not as colorful as you are.
BTW, there will probably be some lurkers who would say, Oh well, we can just agree to disagree. But that's nonsense. We must never default to that compromise position when the Constitution is clear and clearly at stake. Anyone who thinks that the CAF laws are okay should be regarded as disqualified from office--any federal office at all. If Session is not a crook--and he's probably not--then he's an idiot.
-
It took several months for him to get his money back and the feds imposed some kind of tax penalty on him. His attorney explained that the penalty was basically because the feds were pissed off that he had "hoarded" money and effectively removed it from circulation and he wasn't reporting it. He was paying his taxes but much of his earnings never went any further than his pocket.
This is why it should be none of their business what people do with their hard-earned money
-
This is why it should be none of their business what people do with their hard-earned money
If you recall, unusual banking activities is what got Limbaugh busted on the Oxycontin thing.
-
I almost said Session is garbage based on his abominable CAF position alone, but for some reason I stopped short. I guess I'm just not as colorful as you are.
BTW, there will probably be some lurkers who would say, Oh well, we can just agree to disagree. But that's nonsense. We must never default to that compromise position when the Constitution is clear and clearly at stake. Anyone who thinks that the CAF laws are okay should be regarded as disqualified from office--any federal office at all. If Session is not a crook--and he's probably not--then he's an idiot.
NOBODY is as colorful as Frank. Just accept it and move on.
-
NOBODY is as colorful as Frank. Just accept it and move on.
Aha! (But hey, I am not going to endorse all of his crazy notions!) :beer: