re: La. House to vote on recreational weed today. Updated with video link

quote:

---

Do you think you have a right to money earned through illegal activity?

---

The government certainly does. They are shadier than an oak grove.

quote:

---

Do you think you have a right to money earned through illegal activity? If so, you are removing a huge disincentive to criminal activity.

---

frick no, but the government should have to prove you used drug money to buy those things.

Dunno if you are aware but the way the civil forfeiture works is they find drugs...you have to prove that everything they seize was not paid for in drug money. Burden of proof falls back on the defendent...exact opposite of the constitution. Many times the people they are seizing things from are poor and can not afford a lawyer to prove this. But even if you do, its not easy to prove. Lets say you are going to the casino and you have a side jo you get paid in cash, so you bring the cash to play at casino....you get pulled over and cops ask to search the vehicle. You say yes because you have nothing to hide....he finds the cash and seizes it. Says it is suspicious and if you want it back...you have to prove it was made legally. Well now you have to get a lawyer and fight it. Its hard as frick to prove and cost you out of pocket. How the frick is that right?

Oh and the exact above scenerio was happening along I-10 to texas people coming to the LC casinos in the 90s and early 2000s and was all over dateline. It happens all the frick over.

Also we have this thing called the constituion....not sure if you have heard of it or not, but it specifically says this should not be allowed.

Civil assett forfeiture is abused like mother fricker all over. Its an ok law in theory(outside of the pesky constitutional stuff) but with the accuser getting to keep a cut of the money...it opens itself to be ripe for abuse.

quote:

---

Should a diamond thief get to keep the diamonds after they get caught? Should Bernie Madoff been able to keep all the money he stole?

---

absolutely not and nobody with a reasonable mind would say they should. But should the government be able to walk up to a guy on wall street and accuse him of being the next bernie madoff with no proof. They dont arrest him, they just start freezing any assests they cant seize and now the guy has no way to defend himself as he cant pay for it. They freeze all funds he has available and any family that tries to help. So now the guy has to take a deal even though he is innocent because now he is charged with money laundering mutiple times and each count is 20 year sentence. If he goes to court with the court appointed lawyer he stands to lose and spend 25+ years in prison for something he believes he is innocent of.

Now you know why the feds convict at like a 97% rate.

quote:

---

I’m simply saying the idea that money earned illegally should be seized isn’t that crazy.

---

quote:

---

One idea to solve this issue may be to force any money seized to be donated to a charity. This would remove the direct incentive for a police force to seize property.

---

I agree with both of those things so long as the government proves to a jury of the defendents peers that the property was bought and used during drug transactions. The burden should be on the government, not on the accused.


Seriously, think if you worked construction...you dont have a bank account because you are uneducated and dont trust them. (trust me, this is more common in construction than you think and many do not have bank accounts)

you get paid on friday, go tot he store and cash it. You have liek 1200 in cash on you. You get pulled over that night headed to a girls house, cop says he thinks you have been drinking and to step out. He searches you and finds the cash. Says he thinks its drug money and he is taking it and to get it back you will need to file paperwork to prove it isnt drug money and provide a reason you are carrying that amount of money around. He clears you of DWI and gives you a seatbelt ticket as he says you swerved but he is being nice.

So you are cleared of all crimes.....yet now you have to hire a lawyer to get your money back.


or lets say you are selling a car. I agree to buy but you will only take cash. I go pull 10k out and get pulled over on the way to your house. Cops says he smells somehting and to get out. Searches me and finds the money. Nothing else. Says it is drug money and normal people dont carry that around with them. Now I got to spend a couple thousand to prove that it is my fricking money even though I didnt commit any crime.


Think this isnt happening all over the place....yea might want to google. Cash is legal tender and until its not, it should not be legal for the cops to take your cash without charging you in a crime.

Hpefully now you wake up and understand why some of us are so against it.

quote:

---

This federal gravy train is too tempting for some police departments to resist. Louisiana state and local law enforcement agencies fattened their budgets in 2016 by more than $1.4 million through this practice, including these more aggressive departments: Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff's Office, $254,617; Hammond Police Department, $252,534;

---

Well there's a fricking shock.

They're not humble about it either:

I have a couple questions.

In Arizona, I think the voters directly voted on if they wanted marijuana (similar to how we voted directly if we wanted sports betting). Why are we, the voters, not getting this right to vote?

I'm sure a poll of people from this state would show a clear majority want legalization. Why do we have representatives in office going against what their constituents want? Is this not malpractice and totally against the whole point of the system in place? These people should be doing whatever their voters want them to do, not what they think is best.

quote:

---

I think there is an easy solution here.

Legalize weed and a portion of the taxes generated in sales will go to local law enforcement.

Everyone wins right?

---

I'm totally for legalization and the police don't need to get any for all I care. They probably will get some but so will other agencies.

The funny thing is, this board watching too much TV and expounds on one or two stories then blow it up on this board. Barely anyone is getting arrested for weed anymore, very few asset forfeitures for weed, still waiting on the information on all of these fines that the judge orders that find there way back to the arresting agency, and nobody is serving jail or prison time for weed unless they are a multiple violence offender.

Seizing assets from innocent people is a huge problem for me. After a conviction makes more sense.

If you read the Hammond Star, you will notice that 30 - 50% of all Tangipahoa court cases are for drugs. Drug laws are a huge revenue stream for lawyers, judges, cops, prisons, counselors, etc. etc. who wouldn't be needed without these drug laws. It's big business.

quote:

---

How anyone still has faith at all in government is beyond me.

---

I don’t. What time is the vote?

quote:

---

i wasnt talking about me. I was talking about SFP. I promise he knows way more about the number arrested for weed than you.

---

Okay, I'll direct my questions to him then.

quote:

---

What do you do for a living that makes you an expert?

---

I'm not going to out myself on a message board but I've lived all across the state and I've working multiple jobs with the government, courts, and private sector.

quote:

---

Legalize weed and a portion of the taxes generated in sales will go to local law enforcement.

---

The over taxation and over regulation of weed keeps the black market alive.

Politicians are fricking idiots.

quote:

---

funny thing is...Sheriffs actively oppose legalization of something that they totally don't care about

hilarious, right?

---

Maybe they are justing using the "trust" and "support" they have acquired to lean on legislators. They know they have this bill by the balls and they are just using it as a bargaining chip. It's pretty common in legislative compromise/negotiating in my understanding.