Where people do have a problem is when the government seizes money from people who have done nothing wrong and they happen to have a large amount of cash on hand in their safe. The burden of proof should be on the government to prove a person's property was the fruit of a crime before they can take it. It should never be the other way around - which would, like in the situation we've discussed be to the detriment of an innocent person.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I am bothered by the unfairness and randomness of the ‘punishment’. Someone with 50 kilos of marijuana and ten dollars may have his ten dollars confiscated, but someone with half a million and one joint gets his 500K taken away.