10

Stopping America’s Runaway Civil Forfeitures

Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago to Government
38 comments | Share | Flag

Legalized Looting: Does your state have forfeiture laws like this?

All Comments

  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I remember my first calculator in school cost me 125.00 or so, made by Rockwell. Wasn't very smart, but could do square roots.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hey, when I first started in business, pocket calculators were just coming out. The numerals were lit by light emitting diodes and the cheapest ones went for $75. I just bought one at Wal-Mart that does everything one of those did except it doesn't have a constant. It cost $1.69.
    Those 24" screens are usually fussy. You've got to plug them in just so or they refuse to work. Can you imagine what would happen in 1969 if I said I had a computer that was also a telephone, a still and movie camera that I could carry in my pocket, and next year I'm having one implanted in my skull.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Dale, a good discussion point: Does absolute freedom apply to everyone (as you suggest), even when to do so results in harm to others? From an objectivist view wouldn't it be needed that all the members of the society be responsible for themselves? I am not that well versed in it, so your opinion is appreciated.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Absolutely the drug laws should be repelled. They are anti-freedom nonsense. They have caused untold damage to our constitution our freedom and reason. They are part and parcel with the FDA.

    If you do not understand this, then really you do not understand freedom, you are just picking and choosing what feels right. To some people it feels right to have civil asset forfeiture laws an IRS, a NSA, a ATF, etc.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Use the motorcycle helmet analogy. You ride with your medical insurance is valid. You ride without you have no coverage. Do not ask for more than is already required medical treatment...stable. That's federal law so the hospital bills the federal government under the no funding no mandate rule. I don't live and work to support stupidity. Better for the species if they expire.

    And all the crack pot sad sack whiny excuses is not going to get you past stability and a wheel chair ride to the door. While your at it get your hand out of my pocket. Don 't like it? I do not care eat stuff and bark at the moon.

    Therefore paying is a very valid subject of concern. Federal Law federal responsibility if illegals bill their home country, If Oregon wants to save everyone bill Oregon. If they have a nice bank account, land, whatever, forfeiture to pay the freight. If they look in my direction...let them die.

    Easy for me to say? You damn right. My brothers keeper is a religious concept... bill the church.

    and get your hands out of my pocket...and out of my insurance plan.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    gee Herb, that is so old fashioned, I had to turn my 24" screen upside down to see calculator, and pulled the plug out...ouch....
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Dale, I am not so sure that repealing the drug laws is required or desired. I have seen the impact of addiction and it isn't pretty. The whole drug thing is an issue that needs a lot of careful walking into, as it deals with a persons freedom to screw themselves up, and then the burden they place on others in the process, and that is a hard nut to crack. The forfeiture issue is valid in very specific instances, but the money should be earmarked to reimburse the costs to get it, not for them to spend as they wish.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I was 11.The 7734 is my birth date. Put it on your calculator and then turn it upside down. How'd you like to fight that omen all your life?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 2 months ago
    yes -- it gives new validity to Rand's term "looters." -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That supposition is easily also illustrated with HillaryBeasts email. Notice how that is now a moot point, as they all focus on the SC power struggle?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And there you go, place an obviously ethically challenged person in charge of the law enforcement of the nation. Yet she was confirmed. So, I blame all the parties at this point.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And, as they stated, the police departments desire to have a source of unregulated cash to play with as they wish. So, the more they take, the more they get. Conflict of interest anyone?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think it is an abrogation of rights to confiscate anything that is not in a list of very specific crimes, and even then there is a lot of vetting to do before ever going there. The whole concept is open to just this kind of abuse.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thank you, that gets to the root of the issue. They lost sight of that when they started it. It could have been done in such away as to focus on a specific crime and all gains could be forfeited, or some such. But the open nature just spurred the looters on to more and more.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I remember as a little kid in 1945 thinking what a good idea the UN was. If anyone over age 11 thinks so also, their brains have never fully matured.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    She might have been able to get her car back immediately if she'd said that her car was stolen. Of course, her nephew would be in deep weeds for years behind that.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Steven-Wells 9 years, 2 months ago
    Look up the record of US Attorney General Loretta "Sticky Fingers" Lynch, a scoundrel who strongly supports Civil Forfeitures.
    She confiscated nearly half a million dollars from the Hirsch brothers because they made several deposits under $10,000 from their entirely legitimate business. In defiance of the law (the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000) she kept the money for two years.
    Per Rand Paul, "Lynch confiscated over $100 million dollars during her time as U.S. attorney using the process of civil asset forfeiture..."
    Lynch was 0bama's replacement for the loathsome Eric "illegal-Mexican-Gun-Runner" Holder.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Stormi 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It is another in the UN's desire to wipe out the right to any private property, which they call "unsustainable".Interestingly, it is the same law enforcement, which are being trained to enforce UN Agenda 21/2030, which will go after property rights big time. There will be no wrong doing at all involved, just the idea we have no right to anything, when others don't have it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 2 months ago
    Cato has addressed this issue for a long time. One must always keep in mind that those in power do not need to abide by the rules unless somebody with higher power decides to throw them under the bus. An thus we understand the structure and watch who sniffs whose (or is it whoms?) butt.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 2 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "land of the free, right?"
    Yes. When Americans say that, it only sets up to look like asses when we don't live up to our values and rhetoric.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo