To provide a bit of perspective, this is what that quantity of cash looks like. I can't imagine anyone thinking that he was doing anything legitimate.
Probable cause for a traffic stop.
- Thread starter Alfred_B
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: dishdude
There are plenty of stories of the government seizing property without charging the property owner with any crimes. How do you defend denying someone due process?
Honestly there are many many people that truly feel the Guberment is taking away rights all over the place. I honestly don't know where this paranoia ia coming from. It ranges from distrust of surveillance cameras to outright bizarre conviction that 911 was planned by the government.
Here is a news flash: the Guberment is not a single entity like the "Wizard of Oz" that can actually carry out a mass operation like collecting guns from individuals. Even it it could. There are not enough body bags in Government stockpiles to put government workers in assigned to go door to door to collect them.
There are of course factions in Government who are attempting to destroy the country by allowing mass immigration, allowing illegals to vote, not deporting illegals. That is by far the biggest threat. Allowing an invasion while castrating the military and law enforcement to stop it.
That is the only thing I worry about...the dilution of our culture. But again I am powerless to stop it except that I am free to arm myself and protect my person , my family, and my house. And that I will do..gun grabbers not withstanding.
There was just another theatre shooting. The gun grabbers want to remove legal guns (even this guy and his guns were illegal). I want more law abiding citizens to be armed. That is why I more and more carry in church. If I were to go to a theatre I would carry there.
Time for coffee!!
There are plenty of stories of the government seizing property without charging the property owner with any crimes. How do you defend denying someone due process?
Honestly there are many many people that truly feel the Guberment is taking away rights all over the place. I honestly don't know where this paranoia ia coming from. It ranges from distrust of surveillance cameras to outright bizarre conviction that 911 was planned by the government.
Here is a news flash: the Guberment is not a single entity like the "Wizard of Oz" that can actually carry out a mass operation like collecting guns from individuals. Even it it could. There are not enough body bags in Government stockpiles to put government workers in assigned to go door to door to collect them.
There are of course factions in Government who are attempting to destroy the country by allowing mass immigration, allowing illegals to vote, not deporting illegals. That is by far the biggest threat. Allowing an invasion while castrating the military and law enforcement to stop it.
That is the only thing I worry about...the dilution of our culture. But again I am powerless to stop it except that I am free to arm myself and protect my person , my family, and my house. And that I will do..gun grabbers not withstanding.
There was just another theatre shooting. The gun grabbers want to remove legal guns (even this guy and his guns were illegal). I want more law abiding citizens to be armed. That is why I more and more carry in church. If I were to go to a theatre I would carry there.
Time for coffee!!
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Al
There are of course factions in Government who are attempting to destroy the country by allowing mass immigration, allowing illegals to vote, not deporting illegals. That is by far the biggest threat. Allowing an invasion while castrating the military and law enforcement to stop it.
Allowing us to divide ourselves, and not teaching our kids to think critically from both sides, is the biggest threat. It's amazing how immigration has been a "problem" for 100+ years (darn Irish stealing our jobs!) yet no party in power has been able to control it to everyone's liking. Maybe they enjoy perceived and perpetual incompetence so they can drag their tenure out and don't have to invent new scapegoats... like a psychiatrist who can't quite cure you this week, but will make you another appointment...
There are of course factions in Government who are attempting to destroy the country by allowing mass immigration, allowing illegals to vote, not deporting illegals. That is by far the biggest threat. Allowing an invasion while castrating the military and law enforcement to stop it.
Allowing us to divide ourselves, and not teaching our kids to think critically from both sides, is the biggest threat. It's amazing how immigration has been a "problem" for 100+ years (darn Irish stealing our jobs!) yet no party in power has been able to control it to everyone's liking. Maybe they enjoy perceived and perpetual incompetence so they can drag their tenure out and don't have to invent new scapegoats... like a psychiatrist who can't quite cure you this week, but will make you another appointment...
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
To provide a bit of perspective, this is what that quantity of cash looks like. I can't imagine anyone thinking that he was doing anything legitimate.
Just having the money, without proof of any wrong doing or crime being committed, should not allow the Police to seize it. I am sorry but that is not how it is supposed to work here. I don't care how many air fresheners the guy had or where the money was stored in his car( if I had 600K on me I would hide it too ). Unless they also found drugs or some proof it was laundered cash they shouldn't have been able to take it. It is just wrong.
Innocent until proven guilty remember? Our legal system is not supposed to work on the idea that the Police think you might be guilty so they can treat you that way.
To provide a bit of perspective, this is what that quantity of cash looks like. I can't imagine anyone thinking that he was doing anything legitimate.
Just having the money, without proof of any wrong doing or crime being committed, should not allow the Police to seize it. I am sorry but that is not how it is supposed to work here. I don't care how many air fresheners the guy had or where the money was stored in his car( if I had 600K on me I would hide it too ). Unless they also found drugs or some proof it was laundered cash they shouldn't have been able to take it. It is just wrong.
Innocent until proven guilty remember? Our legal system is not supposed to work on the idea that the Police think you might be guilty so they can treat you that way.
Last edited:
I recently flew to Austin with a five figure sum of money. Never had a lick of trouble.
Actually, I can count my experiences with the "law" on one hand. And most of those were as a youngster.
One of the best ways to avoid legal problems is very simple...
Actually, I can count my experiences with the "law" on one hand. And most of those were as a youngster.
One of the best ways to avoid legal problems is very simple...
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
To provide a bit of perspective, this is what that quantity of cash looks like. I can't imagine anyone thinking that he was doing anything legitimate.
Just having the money, without proof of any wrong doing or crime being committed, should not allow the Police to seize it. I am sorry but that is not how it is supposed to work here. I don't care how many air fresheners the guy had or where the money was stored in his car( if I had 600K on me I would hide it too ). Unless they also found drugs or some proof it was laundered cash they shouldn't have been able to take it. It is just wrong.
Innocent until proven guilty remember? Our legal system is not supposed to work on the idea that the Police think you might be guilty so they can treat you that way.
I understand your concern. Unfortunately, there won't ever be narcotics and cash in the same load. Narcotics go north, the cash and guns go south. I don't think that letting this money go would be a wise choice, and I'm glad it was seized.
I imagine the two subjects were given an opportunity roadside to explain the currency. In any case, they're still allowed their day in court to petition for its return.
Originally Posted By: Bandito440
To provide a bit of perspective, this is what that quantity of cash looks like. I can't imagine anyone thinking that he was doing anything legitimate.
Just having the money, without proof of any wrong doing or crime being committed, should not allow the Police to seize it. I am sorry but that is not how it is supposed to work here. I don't care how many air fresheners the guy had or where the money was stored in his car( if I had 600K on me I would hide it too ). Unless they also found drugs or some proof it was laundered cash they shouldn't have been able to take it. It is just wrong.
Innocent until proven guilty remember? Our legal system is not supposed to work on the idea that the Police think you might be guilty so they can treat you that way.
I understand your concern. Unfortunately, there won't ever be narcotics and cash in the same load. Narcotics go north, the cash and guns go south. I don't think that letting this money go would be a wise choice, and I'm glad it was seized.
I imagine the two subjects were given an opportunity roadside to explain the currency. In any case, they're still allowed their day in court to petition for its return.
Originally Posted By: dishdude
When I was a kid, I was told you don't drive into Mexico because the Police are corrupt and will take your car or other possessions for their use. Who would have thought this country would do the same?
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
When I was a kid, I was told you don't drive into Mexico because the Police are corrupt and will take your car or other possessions for their use. Who would have thought this country would do the same?
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
Originally Posted By: Benito
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
Can you give an example of how an apologist has ignored the Constitution. I am looking for one verified real life example..the name of the "apologist", how he ignored the Constitution and how it has led to the police "taking a mile"...and a mile of what???
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
Can you give an example of how an apologist has ignored the Constitution. I am looking for one verified real life example..the name of the "apologist", how he ignored the Constitution and how it has led to the police "taking a mile"...and a mile of what???
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Benito
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
Can you give an example of how an apologist has ignored the Constitution. I am looking for one verified real life example..the name of the "apologist", how he ignored the Constitution and how it has led to the police "taking a mile"...and a mile of what???
Sure. I posted a story on Civil Forfeiture in another thread.
This Nebraska sheriff is unhappy that his ability to confiscate property from legally innocent people is being restricted.
Quote:
There’s also a lesson here about how difficult it can be to undo bad laws. These forfeiture laws were mostly passed at the height of 1980s drug-war panic, usually with little debate and by overwhelming majorities. Although most people are aghast when they hear how civil forfeiture work in practice, it has taken decades of persistent court challenges from groups like IJ and the ACLU, activism from advocacy groups, investigative reporting from media organizations and victims coming forward with their stories to get even modest reforms. I think Holder’s new policy is important, but it does contain some potentially large loopholes, and it could be undone by the next attorney general or the next administration.
It’s very easy to demand politicians “do something” or “do anything” when we’re in the middle of a crisis, real or perceived. But rash legislating can have prolonged, devastating consequences. Forfeiture made police agencies dependent on the bounty of seized property. What began as an unexpected injection of cash eventually became a line item in the “revenue” column of police budgets. That created a pretty powerful constituency invested in preserving the status quo. Mayors and city councils could also become dependent — the portion of police budgets that comes from proceeds is a portion the city can spend elsewhere. Now, any politician who wants to reform civil forfeiture laws risks the wrath of police organizations and their supporters.
We should be cognizant of how easy it can be to give up our civil liberties in times of crisis. We need to remember that it’s usually a [censored] of a struggle to win them back.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...forfeiture-law/
Originally Posted By: Benito
The apologists have been ignoring the constitution and giving the police inch after inch after inch, so they've taken a mile.
Can you give an example of how an apologist has ignored the Constitution. I am looking for one verified real life example..the name of the "apologist", how he ignored the Constitution and how it has led to the police "taking a mile"...and a mile of what???
Sure. I posted a story on Civil Forfeiture in another thread.
This Nebraska sheriff is unhappy that his ability to confiscate property from legally innocent people is being restricted.
Quote:
There’s also a lesson here about how difficult it can be to undo bad laws. These forfeiture laws were mostly passed at the height of 1980s drug-war panic, usually with little debate and by overwhelming majorities. Although most people are aghast when they hear how civil forfeiture work in practice, it has taken decades of persistent court challenges from groups like IJ and the ACLU, activism from advocacy groups, investigative reporting from media organizations and victims coming forward with their stories to get even modest reforms. I think Holder’s new policy is important, but it does contain some potentially large loopholes, and it could be undone by the next attorney general or the next administration.
It’s very easy to demand politicians “do something” or “do anything” when we’re in the middle of a crisis, real or perceived. But rash legislating can have prolonged, devastating consequences. Forfeiture made police agencies dependent on the bounty of seized property. What began as an unexpected injection of cash eventually became a line item in the “revenue” column of police budgets. That created a pretty powerful constituency invested in preserving the status quo. Mayors and city councils could also become dependent — the portion of police budgets that comes from proceeds is a portion the city can spend elsewhere. Now, any politician who wants to reform civil forfeiture laws risks the wrath of police organizations and their supporters.
We should be cognizant of how easy it can be to give up our civil liberties in times of crisis. We need to remember that it’s usually a [censored] of a struggle to win them back.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-...forfeiture-law/
- Status