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

To: afsnco

I see nothing wrong with it so long as all the facts are in before it occurs. If, for example, when (and only when) the motel owner is proved to be involved with the crime should he lose his business. To do so beforehand is clearly a violation of his protections against search and seizure.


5 posted on 01/03/2017 1:10:19 PM PST by Pilgrim's Progress (http://www.baptistbiblebelievers.com/BYTOPICS/tabid/335/Default.aspx D)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Pilgrim's Progress

.......but WHO determines the motel owner is “involved”?

that’s my worry..........the compromise has always been a judge. In Texas, the State Judges are elected. Setting aside that controversial issue, I just don’t trust cops to make these kinds of decisions.


8 posted on 01/03/2017 1:13:53 PM PST by Cen-Tejas (it's the debt bomb stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Pilgrim's Progress

The facts are never in before the forfeiture. This is flat out government stealing.


9 posted on 01/03/2017 1:14:01 PM PST by Founding Father (The Pedophile moHAMmudd (PBUH---Pigblood be upon him); Charles Martel for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Pilgrim's Progress

Ask people whose land is discovered to sit on oil, minerals, etc. Uranium especially that the BLM wants.


15 posted on 01/03/2017 1:16:58 PM PST by txhurl (Break's over, kids, back to WAR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | 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