It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cops talk about stealing man's property over bag of weed

page: 4
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 



This isn't petty behavior, this is a huge asset , forfeiture and seizure program that's been misused by countless police departments nation-wide, and is still being used.




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggy1706
 


AMEN BROTHER



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by conspiracytheoristIAM
 


This is is not an example of any legally valid property seizure at all. These police officers used the pretense of property seizure to steal. There is a world of difference in the two things. Trying to paint it as otherwise is just dishonest.

~Heff



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Planet teleX
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


I see why you're a drummer




One of my singers/guitarists plays through an AC30. It's amazing how limited its range of sounds are. We tried to dial it in for more "beef" / wider tonal spectrum and it just couldn't do it. We ultimately had to attach a 4x12 to it to get it close to being beefy. Plus, the main guitarist in that band uses a Prophesy and the AC30 just cannot compare to the sound that thing emits.

Sorry to deviate from the topic. Cops busting people for an indigenous plant is bad enough, but using the bust as an excuse to steal someone's property is beyond the pale.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   
power corrupts...absolute power corrupts absolutely



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   
What is really sad about this is I have actually watched other Lansing Policemen bust someone for weed, dump said weed in a mud puddle and drive away.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by filosophia
 


From your sourced article:


Now, two of the officers involved -- Lt. Luke Davis and Lt. Emmanuel Riopelle -- are facing "dozens" of charges. Both have been accused in a long-running scheme to steal from drug suspects and profit from sales of their property.


These LEO's broke the law - it happens. And now they are going to pay for their crimes. But this doesn't infer that all cops are bad people. In fact I have a few friends who are in law enforcement and they are straight-up good people who care about others and do not engage in this kind of petty behavior.

~Heff


Great for your 'honorable' friends, but if your wonderful cop friends are even aware of any of their fellow officers engaging in any illegal or corrupt behavior, and your friends are not turning those dirty officers in, then your squeaky clean friends are just as guilty as the dirty cops. Or at least thats the way it would work for me as a regular citizen. If your friends aren't turning in dirty cops, they are just as guilty. And knowing police, your friends do indeed know of some level of corruption within their own force.

FAIL.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animatrix
reply to post by filosophia
 


The seizure laws were originally written for big time dealers that sold enough dope to be able to buy homes, cars and yachts.
It didnt take long for it to be corrupted by the greedy corporations that make up Law Enforcement, Judges and DA's.
Remember the judge a few weeks ago that was busted for sending kids to private prisons on minor offenses, he was getting huge kick backs from the owners of the prisons.
This is what happens when you turn the criminal justice system into a business.

Another Corrupt Judge
edit on 28-2-2011 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)


Did you know that some prisons are actually traded on the NYSE? The cost of their shares goes up and down with the amount of imprisoned they show on the books. Ridiculous and I agree with you 100%.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by James1982
 


As far as the comment about Cops and marijuana, again the argument is against the wrong group. Law Enforcement has nothing to do with the laws on the books and how they come into existance. As far as the war on drugs and prison overcrowding, take it up with the legislative branch and the judicial system.


I have to disagree with you. The police lobby, at least in Illinois, takes decisive political action on a range of issues. Their lobby is well organized/funded and politicians have too high of a regard for their support, IMO. As a general rule they resist anything illegal becoming legal.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


Actually it means the officer were enforcing the laws of the State that were put into place by the elected representatives, who were elected to office by the people of the state.

So please take your values argument to the people of the State of Michigan and not the police.


I hope they dont pass a law to shoot suspects on sight if that is all it takes to get yall to enforce ANY law.

In a lot of states all it takes to get your voting priviliges taken away is a felony conviction.....which Pot is still in most states. So just how are the users susposed to get the law changed if they are not allowed ot vote on it?



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ReptilePete
 


But everyday citizens saves lives also. Does that give them the right to go into your house,pick and chose out of the things you have,make a list,and then take them?



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by conspiracytheoristIAM
 


This is is not an example of any legally valid property seizure at all. These police officers used the pretense of property seizure to steal. There is a world of difference in the two things. Trying to paint it as otherwise is just dishonest.

~Heff




Using the 100 meter rush to judgment does no one any good either. The Officers in the article are under investigation for other incidents, and the removal of the items from the guys house is being looked at. As I said before, without any more information, all we are seeing is the guy whose house was raided, which means its entirely possible we arent getting the entire story from him.

They had a search warrant, which means they had prior knowledge there was illegal activity occuring, and it revolved around drugs. What is not known is the over all extent of the investigation.

Any items that are bought/purchased/procured/etc with drug money can technically be seized as evidence.

Do we know if the items seized were bought with illegal funds? Nope
Do we know they werent bought with illegal unds? Nope

Let the investigation run its course to see what is going on. Law Enforcement is not going to counter the claims the guy is making if the criminal investigations is on going, along with possible civil action from the home owner, the IA investigation into the officers actions, as well as any potential outside agency investigation.

All we know is the warrant was executed, drugs were found, items were seized, and the guy in the crosshairs is the only one giving his version of events.

Gee, I wonder if the guy has any reason to be upset with the Police to the extent that his version might be distorted.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ossminid

Great for your 'honorable' friends, but if your wonderful cop friends are even aware of any of their fellow officers engaging in any illegal or corrupt behavior, and your friends are not turning those dirty officers in, then your squeaky clean friends are just as guilty as the dirty cops. Or at least thats the way it would work for me as a regular citizen. If your friends aren't turning in dirty cops, they are just as guilty. And knowing police, your friends do indeed know of some level of corruption within their own force.

FAIL.


Other than this basket of emotional rhetoric and logical fallacy, did you bring anything of actual substance to the argument? You've made sweeping assumptions about people you do not know, provided zero evidence to support your broad stroke condemnation of an entire segment of the population, and then couched it all in a general call to emotion.

Your position is that if some cops are corrupt, then all cops must be corrupt as corruption can only occur if it is systemic and all inclusive. Is that the argument.

Really?

Let's look at this in another light...

Any of your coworkers ever drink? Does that make you a drunk? Surely it does, after all, if you were not a drunk then you wouldn't allow your coworkers to drink to excess either.

Any of your coworkers ever steal?
Any of your coworkers ever cheat on their taxes?

I hope not. Because by your own standards, whatever they have done, is on you my friend. It's YOUR crime and YOUR sin as well. Because that's how it works for you as a regular citizen. Right?

In the future you might want to think things through a bit better before you throw the word "FAIL' around so much. It doesn't always work out so well.

~Heff



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 





Your position is that if some cops are corrupt,


"They" may not all be corrupt but the forfeiture law that they are abusing IS corrupt, so by definition, they are corrupt as well.
Just do a bit of your own research and find out for yourself. In some cases the cops confiscate vehicles, equipment, homes or entire hotels for sometimes little more than a .25 Oz of pot or a few pain pills.
You tell me what does having a couple of pain pills for personal use, have to do with your personal property, especially if you have a full time, legitimate job?
Or how does being a small time pot smoker, justify an armed raid in the middle of the morning, which in some cases, results in someone being shot because they were surprised by masked strangers busting down their door?

Forfeiture laws were created to target the full time drug dealer, who purchased the items with funds he made from illegally selling drugs, which made the items he bought illegally obtained (contraband)
It has been corrupted, just like the cops that make the forfeiture claims and the judges that approve them.
edit on 1-3-2011 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I think you may have missed the part where I said "if your wonderful cop friends are even aware of any of their fellow officers engaging in any illegal or corrupt behavior, and your friends are not turning those dirty officers in, then your squeaky clean friends are just as guilty as the dirty cops"

Obviously if they don't know about it they aren't guilty. But then that's why I said "if they are even aware". Funny how reading works, huh?


Edit: you also seem to be conveniently ignorant of the very real "blue wall of silence". Keep defending your friends, that PBA card is worth it.
edit on 1-3-2011 by ossminid because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ossminid
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I think you may have missed the part where I said "if your wonderful cop friends are even aware of any of their fellow officers engaging in any illegal or corrupt behavior, and your friends are not turning those dirty officers in, then your squeaky clean friends are just as guilty as the dirty cops"


I never implied my friends were squeaky clean. What I did say is that you have no way of knowing what they do, know about, report, are complicit with, or any other fact about them. You are generalizing based upon zero knowledge of the subject you are discussing.

This is called assumption or conjecture and it is not the basis for stating "fact'.


Originally posted by ossminid

Obviously if they don't know about it they aren't guilty. But then that's why I said "if they are even aware". Funny how reading works, huh?


Yes it is. In fact let's discuss a word related to reading, it's called "context". Loading a statement full of leading speculation is not offset by simply throwing in a "but" or an "if" afterward. The statement will still require rebuttal to be brought into the spectrum of truth. Utilizing this tactic is implicitly disingenuous.

For example: I could say that, in my experience, everyone who hates cops is always either a stoner who is angry over his pot being confiscated, or a habitual drunk driver. This statement would not be directed at anyone in particular but would surely spark the ire of several people posting here.

Of course if I were to say that it would be nothing more than opinion and wouldn't hold any more merit than your opinions about cops do.


Originally posted by ossminid

Edit: you also seem to be conveniently ignorant of the very real "blue wall of silence". Keep defending your friends, that PBA card is worth it.
edit on 1-3-2011 by ossminid because: (no reason given)


I suppose convenient ignorance would also apply to assuming that I either carry any such card or that I am unaware of or in denial of police corruption. What I said was that not all cops are bad. In fact I never even said that my friends are above reproach. What I did say is that they are not all bad. They are good people who take their job seriously.

~Heff



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide


Let's look at this in another light...

Any of your coworkers ever drink? Does that make you a drunk? Surely it does, after all, if you were not a drunk then you wouldn't allow your coworkers to drink to excess either.

Any of your coworkers ever steal?
Any of your coworkers ever cheat on their taxes?





I agree. To lump ALL officers of the Law into the criminal category is wrong. Is there a code of silence,within the gang of blue? You bet,thats been proven. I have met great officers,ones I am very proud of. I have also met everyday citizens,that are just as equal,minus a badge. I think the best thing Police Unions around the United States could do ,is to have their officers, meet and greet those people they protect and serve. To silence the negative image that officers are facing,at an alarming rate.It would go a long way to get sensitivity training, to be tested yearly,Psychological training,better in depth one on one time with officers in hardened crime areas,to better deal with situations ,that puts them in the criminal end of the spectrum.Above all,stay within the realm of protecting,not harming.
edit on 1-3-2011 by sonnny1 because: spelling



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Hefficide


Let's look at this in another light...

Any of your coworkers ever drink? Does that make you a drunk? Surely it does, after all, if you were not a drunk then you wouldn't allow your coworkers to drink to excess either.

Any of your coworkers ever steal?
Any of your coworkers ever cheat on their taxes?





I agree. To lump ALL officers of the Law into the criminal category is wrong. Is there a code of silence,within the gang of blue? You bet,thats been proven. I have met great officers,ones I am very proud of. I have also met everyday citizens,that are just as equal,minus a badge. I think the best thing Police Unions around the United States could do ,is to have their officers, meet and greet those people they protect and serve. To silence the negative image that officers are facing,at an alarming rate.It would go a long way to get sensitivity training, to be tested yearly,Psychological training,better in depth one on one time with officers in hardened crime areas,to better deal with situations ,that puts them in the criminal end of the spectrum.Above all,stay within the realm of protecting,not harming.
edit on 1-3-2011 by sonnny1 because: spelling


It doesnt matter if these cops are carrying out the written law or not.
The last MAJOR ruling that I've read about is that "I was only following orders" is NOT a defense,

I believe that these officers, along with several thousand others across the country are guilty
of the crime of theft AND violating the Fourth Amendment of our Constitution.
edit on 1-3-2011 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)


Ill say again...
The law was originally created to combat major drug suppliers, that made their living selling drugs, not the
CASUAL user that bought an OZ a month or a few pain pills here and there.

Cops, D.A's and Judges have corrupted it to fund their cities, counties and states with funds, PERIOD.

Its turned into a Business.. Understand Now?
edit on 1-3-2011 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-3-2011 by Animatrix because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 
What's really dishonest is the use of asset forfeiture and seizure in any sense. How can the police not be tempted , when they get a portion of what is seized!



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Animatrix
 


What I understand is the Law is being used to infringe on our rights. But the Lawman is using/abusing the law,because the average citizen hasnt complained enough about it. Did you protest when this Law was being proposed,or are you complaining now that its being abused? Which one? I doubt that you were picketing the law makers on said seizure laws. I am not down with the police state,dont get me wrong. Just visit the Links on one of my posts,and you will see even more abuse by LEO'S. I am a BIG proponent of striking these type of laws down. The problem is what percentage of the population is being effected by this. Not enough to have even 1000 people asking their lawmakers to repeal them. From internet domains,to property,land,eminent domain,etc..............All questionable,all abused by the States and Government. The Lawman is just an agent of the abuse.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join