Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: reaganaut1
In it, readers learn how police forces across the country exploit civil asset forfeiture laws to deprive hapless, innocent people of cash and other property.

 

Bull Cheese. Forfeiture laws work. They are a very effective tool in the WOD. Naturally there will be abuses, but the majority of cash and cars siezed are uncontested. Why? Drug dealers write off these losses as a cost of doing business.

6 posted on 09/12/2014 7:19:06 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Responsibility2nd

Other effective tools in the WOD would involve eliminating the entire 5th Amendment, the 6th Amendment, and the 8th Amendment. Too many protections there for drug dealers. We just know that they are usually guilty anyway, so why not eliminate all of the costly formalities?

Also, eliminating the 3rd Amendment and quartering troops in private houses would be quite an effective deterrent against drug dealers.

Only Libs would be against such reasonable, common-sense measures to control the scourge of drug dealers.


7 posted on 09/12/2014 7:43:44 AM PDT by Unknowing (Now is the time for all smart little girls to come to the aid of their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd

Civil forfeiture laws can punish innocent people by depriving them of their home or livelihood for their property being used illegally by others that they have no knowledge of or can’t take reasonable steps to prevent. Every one agrees that is unjust and unfair. No one should be deprived without a prior judicial hearing of their assets just because they’re related to someone who committed a crime.

But that is exactly what civil forfeiture does and it does not breed respect or understanding for law enforcement especially when you are not even being charged with a crime but they can still decide your assets can forfeited to pay for what someone else may have done. Its worse than that because there is no due process that comes into the picture. Unlike in a criminal case where you can be punished after you’re convicted, in a civil forfeiture, the state’s action against you can have no connection whatsoever with whether you are criminally culpable in the first place.


9 posted on 09/12/2014 7:55:59 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Responsibility2nd; Unknowing; goldstategop
the majority of cash and cars siezed are uncontested. Why?

Perhaps because the deck is stacked against the owner: "The government must initially prove by a preponderance of the evidence [NOT beyond a reasonable doubt] that the property is subject to forfeiture. The owners must then prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they had no knowledge of the underlying crime." - http://www.nhbar.org/publications/display-news-issue.asp?id=7171

13 posted on 09/12/2014 10:53:52 AM PDT by ConservingFreedom (A goverrnment strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson