U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:23 AM
 
Location: la la land
27,180 posts, read 11,359,293 times
Reputation: 19285

Advertisements

Civil forfeiture should be banned nationwide, it's far too subject to abuse. Like this:

Cops Use Traffic Stops To Seize Millions From Drivers Never Charged With A Crime - Forbes

and this

The 7 Worst Examples Of Civil Asset Forfeiture | The Daily Caller

I have been opposed to the practice since I worked in LE and saw an elderly couple showing up almost every day begging to get their impounded car back, it was a Cadillac but probably worth less than $4,000. It had been seized because they had allowed their grandson to drive it and he had been arrested for possession of cocaine with intent to sell, the charges were later dropped but the car was never returned to the owner, the claim was that while there was not sufficient evidence to pursue a criminal complaint there was enough to proceed with civil forfeiture.

It's just plain wrong, it needs to go away just like the DEA needs to be dismantled and never resurrected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:35 AM
 
Location: NYC
11,824 posts, read 7,695,291 times
Reputation: 12814
That's what I call Highway robbery. Believe it or not, the police of every city and nation are the biggest robbers compared to real criminals.

Every time a person carrying large amounts of cash on them and is caught by the police, they will try every way possible to seize that money.

If the guy really wants to buy a house, get a bank check. Obviously he was gonna use the cash for something that he doesn't want to be traced to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:40 AM
 
463 posts, read 245,314 times
Reputation: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by J24 View Post
I guess I have more faith in law enforcement than you do. I don't think that I'm going to get stopped by police and have them seize anything simply because "they want to". The people that this happens to "every day" as you say, I'm sure are not innocent citizens just going about their day following the laws. If I'm wrong, please provide some sources as I certainly would be interested. I'm talking about people with 0 drug connections, like me, having their money seized just because they had it.
Ok, I'll find some relevant links for you.

In the meantime, Here is one that is kind of relevant, but it involves a home instead of cash. But it is the same principal. The authorities found a way to steal a house. In this case it involves their son who was caught with $40 worth of heroin:

Parents' house seized after son's drug bust - CNN.com

Maybe cops are different in Oregon (although I doubt it). I am used to Oklahoma.

In the scenario I painted in my last post, it would be up to the individual cop:

He stops you for whatever reason (last time I was pulled over it was for a burned out tag light, that is all it takes).

He finds the money. He asks about it. You show him your bank receipt.

This is the crucial moment. If the cop you are dealing with is generally aboveboard and honest, he MIGHT let you keep the money.

However, if he is just slightly less than honorable, and I mean just slightly, then he will call in a drug dog regardless of your receipt. He knows there is about a 90% chance the dog will hit on your money, and there is a further 90% chance that you won't go to court to try to get your money back. He knows his department, and maybe even him personally, will benefit directly from stealing your money.

Yes, everyday, and to innocent victims. It is one of the reasons they stop people for even the smallest infraction they can find, like a tag light.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Sarasota, FL
2,581 posts, read 1,382,042 times
Reputation: 4783
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Civil forfeiture should be banned nationwide, it's far too subject to abuse. Like this.
Bear in mind that some civil forfeiture cases are justifiable -- not all involve innocent relatives or possession of MJ. Without civil forfeiture, valuable property involved in, say, human trafficking cases, child pornography, espionage, etc., would remain in the hands of dangerous organizations.

It is subject to abuse, but IMO the solution is to tighten the evidentiary standards, and possibly have the proceeds of sale revert to a general state or federal fund, or a victim of crimes fund rather than to local PD's for purchase of equipment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:47 AM
J24
 
Location: Portland, OR
448 posts, read 654,459 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vistaian View Post
Ok, I'll find some relevant links for you.

In the meantime, Here is one that is kind of relevant, but it involves a home instead of cash. But it is the same principal. The authorities found a way to steal a house. In this case it involves their son who was caught with $40 worth of heroin:

Parents' house seized after son's drug bust - CNN.com

Maybe cops are different in Oregon (although I doubt it). I am used to Oklahoma.

In the scenario I painted in my last post, it would be up to the individual cop:

He stops you for whatever reason (last time I was pulled over it was for a burned out tag light, that is all it takes).

He finds the money. He asks about it. You show him your bank receipt.

This is the crucial moment. If the cop you are dealing with is generally aboveboard and honest, he MIGHT let you keep the money.

However, if he is just slightly less than honorable, and I mean just slightly, then he will call in a drug dog regardless of your receipt. He knows there is about a 90% chance the dog will hit on your money, and there is a further 90% chance that you won't go to court to try to get your money back. He knows his department, and maybe even him personally, will benefit directly from stealing your money.

Yes, everyday, and to innocent victims. It is one of the reasons they stop people for even the smallest infraction they can find, like a tag light.
I was born and raised in Oklahoma, I've only been in the Pac NW for 2 1/2 years now. I've never had any contact with LEO up here, but I've had my fair share of encounters during my college years in Oklahoma. I've never been stopped with large amounts of cash, but I've been stopped plenty. I've been asked for consent search my car, to which I politely declined. That was the end of it. I was even arrested once (never charged, it was a dumb alcohol-related MIP nonsense), but I never had my cash or my car seized. I don't know what cops you've dealt with in Oklahoma, but maybe you should examine what you're doing if they're "stealing" your money constantly.


As to the link you provided, while excessive, there were drugs involved... and not something minor like pot. The parents might have been innocent, yes, but their adult son who lived in the house sure wasn't. And after just over a week, they got their house back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:55 AM
 
463 posts, read 245,314 times
Reputation: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by J24 View Post
I was born and raised in Oklahoma, I've only been in the Pac NW for 2 1/2 years now. I've never had any contact with LEO up here, but I've had my fair share of encounters during my college years in Oklahoma. I've never been stopped with large amounts of cash, but I've been stopped plenty. I've been asked for consent search my car, to which I politely declined. That was the end of it. I was even arrested once (never charged, it was a dumb alcohol-related MIP nonsense), but I never had my cash or my car seized. I don't know what cops you've dealt with in Oklahoma, but maybe you should examine what you're doing if they're "stealing" your money constantly.


As to the link you provided, while excessive, there were drugs involved... and not something minor like pot. The parents might have been innocent, yes, but their adult son who lived in the house sure wasn't.
Well, check the other links posted then. After reading just the one story about taking the parent's house because of something the kid did, I can't believe you are defending this law.

Don't you see that if you have kids your house is in jeopardy also? Maybe even if you simply let your siblings, friends, or even parents stay with you, your house is in peril because they might be doing something that you aren't aware of.

It should be obvious to you that if law agencies are stealing entire houses because of a $40 drug sale that we have left the realm of sane punishment. It is ALL about the money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:57 AM
J24
 
Location: Portland, OR
448 posts, read 654,459 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vistaian View Post
Well, check the other links posted then. After reading just the one story about taking the parent's house because of something the kid did, I can't believe you are defending this law.

Don't you see that if you have kids your house is in jeopardy also? Maybe even if you simply let your siblings, friends, or even parents stay with you, your house is in peril because they might be doing something that you aren't aware of.

It should be obvious to you that if law agencies are stealing entire houses because of a $40 drug sale that we have left the realm of sane punishment. It is ALL about the money.
They got their house back after 8 days... they aren't on the street.

Look, I'm not arguing that the laws don't need to be looked at and revised, such as North Carolina that requires a conviction before any property is seized. However, I'd say 9 times out of 10 when this happens, it's not to an "innocent" law abiding citizen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 10:58 AM
 
Location: la la land
27,180 posts, read 11,359,293 times
Reputation: 19285
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnTrips View Post
Bear in mind that some civil forfeiture cases are justifiable -- not all involve innocent relatives or possession of MJ. Without civil forfeiture, valuable property involved in, say, human trafficking cases, child pornography, espionage, etc., would remain in the hands of dangerous organizations.

It is subject to abuse, but IMO the solution is to tighten the evidentiary standards, and possibly have the proceeds of sale revert to a general state or federal fund, or a victim of crimes fund rather than to local PD's for purchase of equipment.
If that valuable property is contraband, i.e. illegal pornographic materials etc then it does not have to be returned. If it's not contraband why would it not be returned?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:01 AM
 
463 posts, read 245,314 times
Reputation: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by J24 View Post
They got their house back after 8 days... they aren't on the street.

Look, I'm not arguing that the laws don't need to be looked at and revised, such as North Carolina that requires a conviction before any property is seized. However, I'd say 9 times out of 10 when this happens, it's not to an "innocent" law abiding citizen.
Ok, 9 times out of 10 I'll give you.

That still means many thousands of "innocent" law abiding citizens become victims every year.

Getting their house back after 8 days is irrelevant. If it had been you, would you be OK with that?

Even attempting to steal their house under those circumstances should ring alarm bells in your head...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2015, 11:08 AM
 
Location: la la land
27,180 posts, read 11,359,293 times
Reputation: 19285
Quote:
Originally Posted by J24 View Post
They got their house back after 8 days... they aren't on the street.

Look, I'm not arguing that the laws don't need to be looked at and revised, such as North Carolina that requires a conviction before any property is seized. However, I'd say 9 times out of 10 when this happens, it's not to an "innocent" law abiding citizen.
Do you know how hard it is to get your stuff back if you don't have an attorney? The courts won't appoint one for you in a civil matter. Most people wouldn't even know how to file a motion for return of their property, would you? What form do you use? What needs to be included in the filing? It's not as easy as walking into the court and saying 'give me my property back'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top