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

To: LloydofDSS
This whole thing stinks to high heaven, to take property without a trial and conviction is against all basic tenets of the constitution. Whatever happened to this?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated

Oh, that's right, the constitution is a living breathing document. My mistake, so sorry.

This is a crock, the constitution is there for a reason, and they just ignore it.

Whatever happened to the constitution? It seems to have gotten lost somewhere...
17 posted on 01/12/2002 12:38:31 AM PST by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Aric2000
Whatever happened to the constitution? It seems to have gotten lost somewhere...

It's not lost. It's currently in the possession of the DEA, where they use it for a doormat.

19 posted on 01/12/2002 1:09:11 AM PST by pariah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Aric2000
This whole thing stinks to high heaven, to take property without a trial and conviction is against all basic tenets of the constitution. Whatever happened to this?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

Oh, that's right, the constitution is a living breathing document. My mistake, so sorry.

This is a crock, the constitution is there for a reason, and they just ignore it.

Whatever happened to the constitution? It seems to have gotten lost somewhere...

The Supremes, when they support this kind of law, will say "it's not unreasonable search and seizure. It's reasonable, because big, bad, nasty drugs were involved."

Remember the case (Bennis vs. Michigan, 1996) in which a guy was caught with a hooker? His car was confiscated.
Well, it wasn't his car. It was jointly owned with his wife. She fought the confiscation, and it went all the way to the Supremes. In a landmark decision, they ruled that her car goes to the cops. "(F)forfeiture...serves a deterrent purpose distinct from any punitive purpose."

In other words, it's okay to take your house, your car, your everything for an insignificant offense...because that isn't punishment. Soooo...as if it's not enough that her husband gets a BJ from a hooker, she loses her car, too.

This similar case makes me sick.

57 posted on 01/12/2002 4:08:03 AM PST by TwakeIDFins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | 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