Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
To: LibWhacker
Federal thieves. This is one law that needs to be removed from the books. It is a terrible law.
67 posted on
12/21/2007 3:53:24 AM PST by
saganite
(Lust type what you what in the “tagline” space)
To: LibWhacker
Our govt hates cash. They want the money in places they can see and access.
To: LibWhacker
The government has no right to steal our money.
this is wrong at every level.
79 posted on
12/21/2007 5:22:07 AM PST by
commonguymd
(Move it to the right -Vote for Fred!)
To: LibWhacker
Any law enforcement agency can confiscate any currency from anyone if there is any reason to stop that person for anything or to search his person or domicile. They only have to see it. They don’t even bother with rationalizations anymore.
81 posted on
12/21/2007 5:25:09 AM PST by
arthurus
(Better to fight them OVER THERE than to have to fight them OVER HERE!)
To: LibWhacker
And the fun part is that the government will use our tax money, which they did not earn, to defend their improper confiscation of this man’s money, which they did not earn.
92 posted on
12/21/2007 5:36:17 AM PST by
Teacher317
(Eta kuram na smekh)
To: LibWhacker
The law is tilted in favor of the FBI in that Ricks need not be charged with a crime and the FBI stands a good chance at keeping the money, Gamso said. If the government doesn't take most of your money through taxes, they can take what is left just because they feel like it.
If that happened to me, I'd probably go "postal", big time.
94 posted on
12/21/2007 5:49:14 AM PST by
varon
(Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
To: LibWhacker
They are saying I have to prove I made it,
Guilty until proven innocent.
97 posted on
12/21/2007 5:58:18 AM PST by
Rb ver. 2.0
(Global warming is the new Marxism.)
To: LibWhacker
Where are all of the law and order “If you have nothing to hide, why worry...” FReepers?
100 posted on
12/21/2007 6:01:32 AM PST by
mad_as_he$$
("Has there been a code nine? Have you heard from the Doctor?")
To: LibWhacker
The actions of a police state.
103 posted on
12/21/2007 6:06:19 AM PST by
DaGman
To: LibWhacker
I feel for the guy. I’d like the $400K or so I’ve paid in taxes over my lifetime so far back from the Government, too!
So much money for so little return... :(
106 posted on
12/21/2007 6:24:06 AM PST by
Diana in Wisconsin
(Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
To: LibWhacker
On its face this is just wrong.
However, the Feds just don’t “step-in” to a case unless they participated in it. It’s not like Big Brother swoops in and steals money, they were there for a reason. What I want to know is, what is the rest of the story?
To: LibWhacker; Travis McGee; Squantos; Joe Brower
"If the FBI does keep the money, it would be put toward a law enforcement use" buying more armored vehicles and ninja equipment to use on future such fund-raisers.
To: LibWhacker
Stories like this is just bait to draw in “concerned” posters and discord of those that oppose the governmental control of the citizens. I can just imagine this huge room full of NSA people (The Simpsons Movie) that read every posting of of all political forums.
To: LibWhacker
The FBI learned all about the law from prosecutor Nifong.
121 posted on
12/21/2007 7:30:42 AM PST by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: LibWhacker
Fumbling Bumbling Idiots are at it again. Their bribe fund must be short!
124 posted on
12/21/2007 7:37:15 AM PST by
JayAr36
(What good has Islam provided for the World?)
To: LibWhacker
Completely and totally unconstitutional. Thanks, failed war on some drugs.
To: LibWhacker
“The law will presume it is the result of ill-gotten gains,”
Meaning the ‘law’ is in contradiction to our basic concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’.
131 posted on
12/21/2007 8:14:54 AM PST by
UCANSEE2
(Just saying what 'they' won't.)
To: LibWhacker
New Ford 500s for everyone in the office.
To: LibWhacker
Awful story.
I wonder what the fine is in Lima for possession of pot (misdemeanor, assuming less than 2 ounces, for instance). Maybe $500? At most, $1,000?
Yet in this case, the essential penalty is a couple’s life savings, more than $400,000.
That’s terrible. Not at all what our forefathers envisioned for us as citizens.
166 posted on
12/21/2007 10:17:16 AM PST by
buckleyfan
(WFB, save us!)
To: LibWhacker
The law of forfeiture basically says you have to prove youre innocent. Its terrible, terrible law, he said. Amen to that.
181 posted on
12/21/2007 10:59:40 AM PST by
montag813
("How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!" -Churchill)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-52 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson