Posted on 03/31/2016 3:31:33 PM PDT by lowbridge
Here's an interesting factoid about contemporary policing: In 2014, for the first time ever, law enforcement officers took more property from American citizens than burglars did. Martin Armstrong pointed this out at his blog, Armstrong Economics, last week.
Officers can take cash and property from people without convicting or even charging them with a crime — yes, really! — through the highly controversial practice known as civil asset forfeiture. Last year, according to the Institute for Justice, the Treasury and Justice departments deposited more than $5 billion into their respective asset forfeiture funds. That same year, the FBI reports that burglary losses topped out at $3.5 billion.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Asset Forfeiture Seizure = Legalized Highway Robbery
This is what Robin Hood was Actually fighting before the Left re-wrote him into a Marxist hero.
"If you're happy and you know it clank your chains (clank, clank)...
This is why we’d never see a War On Drugs won even if people really wanted to win it.
Because... this is a taaaaaaaaaaaaaaax.
[ Because... this is a taaaaaaaaaaaaaaax. ]
It is the “Tyrant Tax” they can enforce a tax anytime on anyone for any reason....
Well, if you didn’t do anything wrong, you don’t have anything to worry about. I’ve heard that used in cases like this.
What life is like after police ransack your house and take ‘every belonging’ — then the charges are dropped
Then there was the family in Leawood Kansas:
Leawood couple loses lawsuit over failed marijuana raid at their home
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article50908520.html
It’s a pretty stable racket anyhow. They tax the small to medium drug dealers this way, the drug dealers pay the baksheesh, and they go on drug dealing.
The last thing some people would want, and this is on both sides, is for this to end.
You baited the libertarians. Never, ever, do that.
Bear with me here... the 3rd Amendment is the one that restricts the government from quartering soldiers in our homes. Nobody ever cites this amendment for anything and it never gets litigated, so I doubt there is much precedent about it. It’s basically considered useless.
What if someone sues the government over civil forfeiture citing a 3rd amendment violation? I mean, sure the amendment talks about soldiers in the home, but you could make the argument that agents of the government are no different than soldiers and that taking our property for their own use is no different than moving into our property and using it for their own use. Worth a shot maybe.
Don’t get me wrong, I think police should be kept on a short leash. Every power you give them is bound to be abused at some point.
I was not saying you were wrong.
Totally agree.
Was thinking sarcasm.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.