- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Police Civil Asset Forfeitures Exceed All Burglaries in 2014
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:01 pm
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:01 pm
quote:
Between 1989 and 2010, U.S. attorneys seized an estimated $12.6 billion in asset forfeiture cases. The growth rate during that time averaged +19.4% annually. In 2010 alone, the value of assets seized grew by +52.8% from 2009 and was six times greater than the total for 1989. Then by 2014, that number had ballooned to roughly $4.5 billion for the year, making this 35% of the entire number of assets collected from 1989 to 2010 in a single year. According to the FBI, the total amount of goods stolen by criminals in 2014 burglary offenses suffered an estimated $3.9 billion in property losses. This means that the police are now taking more assets than the criminals.
quote:
Bloomberg News has reported now that Stop-and-Seize authority is turning the Police Into Self-Funding Gangs. They are simply confiscating money all under the abuse of this civil asset forfeiture where they do not have to prove you did anything. Prosecutors are now instructing police on how to confiscate money within the grey area of the law.
A class action lawsuit was filed against Washington DC where police were robbing people for as little as having $100 in their pocket. This is getting really out of hand and it has indeed converted police into legal criminals or “gangs” as Bloomberg News calls them.
LINK
This post was edited on 11/17/15 at 8:03 pm
10
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:02 pm to stout
Civil Asset Forfeiture isn't as cut and dried as people want to make it out to be.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:03 pm to KosmoCramer
No and that's part of the problem. It's so convoluted that it's easily abused.
This post was edited on 11/17/15 at 8:16 pm
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:15 pm to stout
quote:
It's so convenient that it's routinely abused.
FIFY
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:15 pm to stout
I consider myself to be pro police and give them the benefit of the doubt when there is no "smoking gun" but this is pretty damning and screams abuse
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:18 pm to stout
It wouldn't shock me if Philly's take in it was in the 3 commas range. That department is run like the Irish Mob.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:19 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Civil Asset Forfeiture isn't as cut and dried as people want to make it out to be.
I have an idea to make it simple: Convict someone of a crime before you're allowed to take their property. You know, like the Constitution says.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:20 pm to stout
govt are the biggest criminals in the world
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:20 pm to stout
Spoils of war.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:22 pm to KosmoCramer
No, it's much, much worse.
Thieving cops are the worst.
I expect good ol Louisiana is up there on that list.
Thieving cops are the worst.
I expect good ol Louisiana is up there on that list.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:24 pm to Rhino5
quote:
Spoils of the drug war.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:27 pm to VetteGuy
quote:
Thieving cops are the worst.
Along with their co-conspirators, Prosecutors and judges. They all split the take.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:34 pm to stout
The gov't legally has the power to rob you of your money and property on bullshite charges.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:45 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
I have an idea to make it simple: Convict someone of a crime before you're allowed to take their property. You know, like the Constitution says
There's a politician trying to do this in Oklahoma but the pro police crowd says that if you do that then you support drug dealers and the Mexican mafia.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:50 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
I have an idea to make it simple: Convict someone of a crime before you're allowed to take their property. You know, like the Constitution says.
Can you show me where it says you must convict someone before taking their property in the Constitution?
If memory serves, there are less than 5,000 words in the Constitution. Less than 10,000 including the 27 Amendments made to the Constitution. To my knowledge, the Constitution does not address asset forfeiture.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 8:58 pm to O
quote:
Can you show me where it says you must convict someone before taking their property in the Constitution?
If memory serves, there are less than 5,000 words in the Constitution. Less than 10,000 including the 27 Amendments made to the Constitution. To my knowledge, the Constitution does not address asset forfeiture.
quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things ...
Amendment Numero Cuatro
Posted on 11/17/15 at 9:08 pm to CherryGarciaMan
quote:
Amendment Numero Cuatro
quote:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things ...
Oh? I'm still not seeing anything on civil asset forfeiture. Civil forfeiture proceeds against the property, not the person. You don't need a criminal charge or conviction against a person for civil forfeiture to occur.
I thought we were discussing civil forfeiture, not criminal forfeiture. For criminal forfeiture there are certainly procedural rights found in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 9:10 pm to O
quote:
You don't need a criminal charge or conviction against a person for civil forfeiture to occur.
Right. Which is why it is bullshite.
And unconstitutional.
Posted on 11/17/15 at 9:12 pm to O
It is he most cut and dry topic I have ever read about. It is a disgrace to this country that this takes place period.
This post was edited on 11/17/15 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 11/17/15 at 9:13 pm to CherryGarciaMan
quote:
Right. Which is why it is bullshite.
And unconstitutional.
It's total bullshite. I fully agree with you there. Unconstitutional? I have my doubts. If it was unconstitutional the Supreme Court would have put an end to it when a few cases were heard in the 90s. It's still going on, stronger than ever!
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News