Civil Asset Forfeiture

If the Govt can use the money I paid in taxes to prosecute me then absolutely.

 

That is an idea that I can get behind. As far as I'm concerned, if someone wants to keep a million bucks in cash in the glove compartment of their car then, considering the fact that they have possession of it, it's theirs. Why does the frigging Government feel that if someone is found to have large amounts of cash in their pocket then it must be assumed to be ill gotten gains? The original intent of this law had merit however, as soon as it was passed into law local LE started licking their lips in anticipation of "extra cash to spend."

 

Lots of stories out there of people driving somewhere to buy a used vehicle with cash and getting it stolen by the cops.

 

This. I was just considering this the other day in regards to my convertible thread in general. One of the better deals was a private party in Illinois. What if I get pulled over on the way to buy the car and have $20-30k in my pocket? They'd take it and I'd never see it again.

 

And that's the fallout from the WOD.
Stepping on the Constitutional rights of innocent people.
Remember when you used to hear "better a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted"?
It seems just the opposite these days.
Seems anything can be justified if it's the WOD.

 

WOD? Workout of the Day?

 

War on drugs.

 

Unfortunately unintended consequences like this seem like they always pop up whenever the government gets involved. IMO, unless they have proof that the money is from something illegal they need to keep their dickskinners off of it.

 

Unless they can convince a Judge to issue a warrant for the money, then absolutely they should be able to use it to defend themselves. You suspect that the $ came from selling drugs, but without proof the gov should not be able to legally seize it.

Have we forgotten 'innocent until proven guilty' in this country? Its hard to believe so many here are willing to allow the gov the unimpeded ability to steal personal property with little to no recourse for the public.

 

I understand that, and from a purely academic pov it makes perfect sense. But in the real world, we all know that with enough money, you're essentially above the law, so the idea that a criminal can use the profits from his criminal enterprise to avoid prosecution seems wrong.

 

I agree

 

I'm just going to pretend you didn't change my words and relish in the rare occasion that you agree with me

 

If it's so obvious that the money was illegally obtained than any defense will be for naught.

That doesn't change the fact that the gov is stealing from private citizens without due process.

And to be clear I'd much rather that money go to an attorney than to the government.

 

Or we could just legalize everything and remove the profit motive from drugs. The addiction rates would scarcely twitch in the short term, those who have the propensity to overdo it will die off, and drug abuse will end up dropping in the long term.

OH, wait... my bad, there's no money in that solution.

 

That's not really the issue. What he's done is gone beyond mere enforcement and removed the prosecutor's discretion in seeking/recommending sentences for a crime he personally feels is bad. It's a broad stroke order that would unfairly affect countless people. The only saving grace is that the AG has no authority over the courts, meaning judges can still use their discretion in handing out the actual sentence.

 

Nope they prefer the old way where the king picked and choose which laws were good enough.

 

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/in...res-taken-exclusive-investigation/2457838002/