No American should be comfortable with our nation’s asset forfeiture laws

[nebraska]

No American should be comfortable with our nation’s asset forfeiture laws

http://www.northwestgeorgianews.com/rome...2e818.html

[Bob Butler 54]

I'd agree with the Supreme Court on this one. This is an old one, though.

[nebraska]

It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.

[David Horn]

There was a case of a young man carrying a bag on a train who was approached by a DEA agent and asked to show the contents of his bag. He had no drugs but he did have several thousand dollars in cash. He claimed it was seed money for a business. There was no evidence to the contrary. The DEA agent seized the money, and told him that he would have to go to court to get it back. He tried. He had proof that his story was valid, though he had no reason to need an excuse, but the court OK'd the DEA keeping the money anyway. Needless to say, the business opportunity died. Apparently, this is a common practice.

Asset forfeiture prior to conviction is wrong on every level.

[pbrower2a]

(01-29-2018, 11:27 AM)David Horn Wrote: There was a case of a young man carrying a bag on a train who was approached by a DEA agent and asked to show the contents of his bag.  He had no drugs but he did have several thousand dollars in cash.  He claimed it was seed money for a business.  There was no evidence to the contrary.  The DEA agent seized the money, and told him that he would have to go to court to get it back.  He tried.  He had proof that his story was valid, though he had no reason to need an excuse, but the court OK'd the DEA keeping the money anyway.  Needless to say, the business opportunity died.  Apparently, this is a common practice.

Asset forfeiture prior to conviction is wrong on every level.

Carrying seed money as cash is asking for trouble. It might be how some communities do business, but there are safer ways to hold assets -- like debit cards and cashier's checks.

[nebraska]

https://www.popsci.com/card-reader-allow...ects-money

[David Horn]

(01-29-2018, 11:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 11:27 AM)David Horn Wrote: There was a case of a young man carrying a bag on a train who was approached by a DEA agent and asked to show the contents of his bag.  He had no drugs but he did have several thousand dollars in cash.  He claimed it was seed money for a business.  There was no evidence to the contrary.  The DEA agent seized the money, and told him that he would have to go to court to get it back.  He tried.  He had proof that his story was valid, though he had no reason to need an excuse, but the court OK'd the DEA keeping the money anyway.  Needless to say, the business opportunity died.  Apparently, this is a common practice.

Asset forfeiture prior to conviction is wrong on every level.

Carrying seed money as cash is asking for trouble. It might be how some communities do business, but there are safer ways to hold assets -- like debit cards and cashier's checks.

It's hard to fault the guy with the money.  Yes, he should have done this differently, but he broke no laws.  The 4th Amendment should have protected him, but it didn't.

[Ragnarök_62]

(01-30-2018, 01:03 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 11:31 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(01-29-2018, 11:27 AM)David Horn Wrote: There was a case of a young man carrying a bag on a train who was approached by a DEA agent and asked to show the contents of his bag.  He had no drugs but he did have several thousand dollars in cash.  He claimed it was seed money for a business.  There was no evidence to the contrary.  The DEA agent seized the money, and told him that he would have to go to court to get it back.  He tried.  He had proof that his story was valid, though he had no reason to need an excuse, but the court OK'd the DEA keeping the money anyway.  Needless to say, the business opportunity died.  Apparently, this is a common practice.

Asset forfeiture prior to conviction is wrong on every level.

Carrying seed money as cash is asking for trouble. It might be how some communities do business, but there are safer ways to hold assets -- like debit cards and cashier's checks.

It's hard to fault the guy with the money.  Yes, he should have done this differently, but he broke no laws.  The 4th Amendment should have protected him, but it didn't.

The DEA is one agency that should be abolished. It does no good. Civil asset forfeiture should only be allowed after conviction. Although it wouldn't really be called that... I suppose. It's so nice, another ghost of Nixon running amok.

[nebraska]

Asset forfeiture shouldn't be allowed at all.

[bobc]

Asset forfeiture is a horrible practice when it is not the result of a criminal conviction. It is an end run around the US Constitution to say you are not found guilty in a court of law, but your money or assets are, so are going to be seized in a civil case, instead of a criminal one.

[1948]

The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.