Jeff Sessions wants police to take more cash from American citizens

Like it or not, it has a huge platform for abuse. If this becomes mainstream you can count on abuse and a cascade of the general loss of more freedoms.

Well most US citizens have supported their country seizing assets from other countries, investing is what it is called, that's right
Taking from the poor to give to themselves

It is funny, big buisness is never touched,,I guess they buy the votes

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Typical fascist republican policies.
When will we learn America?

Can someone check the temperature in hell? Krazy just posted a thread I completely agree with...this is a total violation of our rights under the constitution. Whatever happened to guilty until proven innocent?

Also if this is how they're gonna play why do so many politicians get to keep their illegal proceeds?

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I have no problem at all with police confiscating the assets of convicted drug dealers.
They should be forced to donate the money to charity though.
But like every other rule or law somebody always abuses the system.

That's not what this thread is about, though.

This thread is about legal-thievery by LEO's who have not convinced anyone of any crime.

Happened to a FB friend of mine quite often. He had a record from when he was a young adult, and then he legit turned his path around and became a businessman. He was flipping cars, but had no business name yet or licence to deal cars out of a lot. So when he'd get pulled over with a few thousand in cash, right to the freaking police it would go. Months, sometimes years for him to get his money back IF he got it back at all.

This is outrageous.

-Alee

originally posted by: Gandalf77
Typical fascist republican policies.
When will we learn America?

This is a bi-partisan issue.

i thought that this thing has been happening for a long time now, has anything changed ?

Law enforcement took more stuff from people than burglars did last year

a reply to: Krazysh0t

"With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures.

Right there. When the action must first be conditioned with promises like that you just know you are being taken for a ride.

originally posted by: Dr UAE
i thought that this thing has been happening for a long time now, has anything changed ?

Law enforcement took more stuff from people than burglars did last year

It's true that it has been going on for a long time now, but towards the end of Obama's Presidency he tried to curb it somewhat. Sessions on the other hand not only wants to restore previous levels and policies but wants to increase the asset forfeiture still. The problem I'm pointing out isn't really the policy's existence (which don't get me wrong is a HUGE problem) its that Sessions is trying to reverse a policy trend that the people demanded during the Obama years.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: Krazysh0t

"With care and professionalism, we plan to develop policies to increase forfeitures.

Right there. When the action must first be conditioned with promises like that you just know you are being taken for a ride.

Agreed 100%. That is political speak for, "We are molding the problem to fit the solution".

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Asset forfeiture--it's nearly as tough a call for me as the death penalty.

On one end, assets that have quite a bit of evidence that they were or are accumulated via illegal means should, at the very least, be frozen before they get transferred to another individual and, by the time trial comes along, none of the evidence exists in the possession of the suspect anymore.

But at the same time, there's that wonderful 4th Amendment that, pretty plainly, notes that:

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 to be seized.

Now, in many cases of asset forfeiture (probably most), there is absolute reason to remove property from an individual. Furthermore, most asset forfeiture is done with prior notice or after a trial has occurred. I'm relatively okay with providing notice first, and I'm definitely okay with seizing assets after someone has been found guilty of something.

What I'm not okay with, at all, are those instances where a LEO can permanently confiscate money or items on the spot from someone who they merely suspect may be doing something illegal. IMO, this is absolutely a violation of the 4th Amendment and should not be tolerated by anyone, anywhere, period. If this is the type of forfeiture that Sessions is citing, then he can take his idea and go straight to hell with it.

The problem is, this WaPo article doesn't elaborate much on what Sessions wants to do, just gives a lesson of different types of forfeitures and examples of when it was abused. Not a very informative article, really. The Reason article in this thread isn't much more elaborative, either, but does mention this:

Although the details have yet to be released, Sessions' directive appears likely to loosen the restrictions on "adoptions" of forfeiture cases by the federal government—an alarming prospect for opponents of asset forfeiture.

If this is the case, I am 100% against it.

Slow on the draw, Krazy

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Shamrock6

I tired using the search feature... It didn't pop up. I think it's ok though since that other thread is in the mud pit.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Slow on the draw, Krazy

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seize his stars, Shammy.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think so, yea. Really I was more interested in giving you a hard time for being slow with this than shutting your thread down. Keep you on your toes.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm down with asset forfeiture in the cases of a conviction, but without that conviction then police need to come up with another way to get their perp.

If this is the case, I am 100% against it.

This is just par the course for Sessions the pot hating and private prison loving 1980's drug crusader dinosaur.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think so, yea. Really I was more interested in giving you a hard time for being slow with this than shutting your thread down. Keep you on your toes.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Slow on the draw, Krazy

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Seize his stars, Shammy.

Given how lefty Krazy is, all stars and flags he "earns" should be forfeited from the word "go."

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Given how lefty Krazy is, all stars and flags he "earns" should be forfeited from the word "go."

He should give them to unpopular members like you and me.