I'll give credit where credit is due, the administration got one, I repeat, one right

[4est_4est_Gump]

Big, huge news on the civil asset forfeiture front: Eric Holder is ordering an end to most of the Department of Justice’s Equitable Sharing Program. This is the program where the DOJ works with local law enforcement agencies for busts, and then the law enforcement agencies are permitted to keep 80 percent of the assets seized. It has been an incubator of the worst police abuses, as some agencies looked for any possible reason to take people’s property without ever actually accusing them with a crime.

The Washington Post has the scoop:

http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/16/eric-holder-orders-end-to-doj-program-th

 

[NeverEndingMe]

great so now the police are thugs stealing property and assets

 

[FGB]

About time.

I've followed this over the years ...Naturally the results were predictable.

The more power the more greed and corruption and abuse.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

great so now the police are thugs stealing property and assets

About time.

I've followed this over the years ...Naturally the results were predictable.

The more power the more greed and corruption and abuse.

Me too, as a Libertarian, it has appalled me for the longest time that the mere possession of drugs could result in Napoleonic law...

 

[Que]

Me too, as a Libertarian, it has appalled me for the longest time that the mere possession of drugs could result in Napoleonic law...

Worse...it doesn't even have to be possession of actual drugs...possession of cash near drugs is enough.

A friend of mine had 900 in his pocket he was going to buy an engine the next day. He gives a co-worker a ride home. She suggests the stop in for a beer. Meanwhile in the bar she tries to sell a gram of coke to an undercover. They seize his money. He never got it back.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Worse...it doesn't even have to be possession of actual drugs...possession of cash near drugs is enough.

A friend of mine had 900 in his pocket he was going to buy an engine the next day. He gives a co-worker a ride home. She suggests the stop in for a beer. Meanwhile in the bar she tries to sell a gram of coke to an undercover. They seize his money. He never got it back.

see, proof that those in government are 'legal' criminals


Never trust the police...they are evil

 

[Shagly]

see, proof that those in government are 'legal' criminals


Never trust the police...they are evil

Cops are wicked, civilians need weapons to fight back.

 

[patient1]

I worked for a time inspecting vineyards. One of them had been purchased at auction. It seems that a bartender was selling marijuana "under the table" at a bar, and the bar owner lost the bar property and the vineyard to the police force that arrested them.

Not even the scene of the crime, the damned vineyard! They confiscated a source of legitimate income!

I wonder if anybody ever lost an apartment building because somebody was dealing drugs from it.



Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Good riddance to bad policy!

 

[Liar]

great so now the police are thugs stealing property and assets

Well... yeah.

 

[Balladeer08]

Originally Posted by NeverEndingMe
see, proof that those in government are 'legal' criminals


Never trust the police...they are evil

Cops are wicked, civilians need weapons to fight back.

I can't believe how simple-minded people can be. Re-write those sentences using "blacks", or "whites", or "mormons" or any other group name in place of "cops".

Do you seriously believe you can label ALL members of any group that way?

What you need are better cops, which requires better pay, training and education. And elimination of laws like this one which just beg to be abused and generate corruption.

 

[Liar]

Civil forfetitude is bizarre. Especially the legal action against non jucidial entities, a.k.a inanimate objects. The state of Missouri vs This Pile Of Cash. With reversed burden of proof. Because fuck you.

 

[Sean]

I can't believe how simple-minded people can be. Re-write those sentences using "blacks",

Probably not the best thing to say to Shagly the Racist Paedophile.

 

[unregistered]

 

[patient1]

So does he have the unilateral authority to do this or is he, like everything else, usurping actual legislated law?

I don't know. He might be trying to pre-empt a legislative solution, there are proposals. He might have found a conscience.

My cynical instinct says that he's grandstanding for a place in history now that he can see the end of his service in the office.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Worse...it doesn't even have to be possession of actual drugs...possession of cash near drugs is enough.

A friend of mine had 900 in his pocket he was going to buy an engine the next day. He gives a co-worker a ride home. She suggests the stop in for a beer. Meanwhile in the bar she tries to sell a gram of coke to an undercover. They seize his money. He never got it back.

The scrutiny of cash transactions and bank reporting bothers me greatly too.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I worked for a time inspecting vineyards. One of them had been purchased at auction. It seems that a bartender was selling marijuana "under the table" at a bar, and the bar owner lost the bar property and the vineyard to the police force that arrested them.

Not even the scene of the crime, the damned vineyard! They confiscated a source of legitimate income!

I wonder if anybody ever lost an apartment building because somebody was dealing drugs from it.



Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Good riddance to bad policy!

I agree, say hello to Chey for me.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So does he have the unilateral authority to do this or is he, like everything else, usurping actual legislated law?

I understand. If I am against all of the edicts, then I must oppose this one.

I don't think they were in power when this was imposed.

I wish it had been legislative.

I think both sides tried to prove that they were tougher than the other on the war on drugs and that this was a bipartisan success, but it was a bad idea from the start. Like many bad tax plans, it was aimed at those on top, but fell heaviest on those not on the top.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I don't know. He might be trying to pre-empt a legislative solution, there are proposals. He might have found a conscience.

My cynical instinct says that he's grandstanding for a place in history now that he can see the end of his service in the office.

He's not grandstanding.

He's actually pushing through his agenda and double-dawg daring anyone to cross the voters who approve of what he is doing.

 

[patient1]

He's not grandstanding.

He's actually pushing through his agenda and double-dawg daring anyone to cross the voters who approve of what he is doing.

Well then, I agree with you.
Ata Boy General Holder!

She says "Hey!"

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Gen'ral Hold her...



OK, I like that tone...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So does he have the unilateral authority to do this or is he, like everything else, usurping actual legislated law?

Also, let me continue to expand; this fits in with the mantra that this policy hurts minorities the most...,



Therefore the reversal would be a protection plan.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

HEY!



Mrs Smartie Pants