Page 1 of 2

Government Theft

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2019 7:19 pm
by Vonz90

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2019 8:34 pm
by randy
I read an article recently (don't have a link handy) where a federal court just kicked an asset seizure case back to the Indiana courts calling seizure of a $40K vehicle for a drug case with a max fine of around $10K (IIRC) excessive under the 8th Amendment.

So some glimmer of hope of some good news out there.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2019 9:37 pm
by Netpackrat
As an aside, I find it infuriating when SCOTUS (or other higher court for that matter) sends a case back to the lower court (that fucked it up in the first place) for rework, instead of just rendering the damned decision themselves. Because then the wronged party has to spend yet more time and money re-fighting the case in a court that’s already hostile to him.

We had a case like that recently here in AK where a guy sued the Park Service over their asserting control over the state’s waterways. The 9th circuit ruled against the guy twice, the second time even after SCOTUS threw out their decision and sent the case back for rehearing. His second trip to the Supremes resulted in a 9-0 decision in his favor, at an ultimate cost of a million and a half to him and his donors.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:46 am
by D5CAV
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws are some of the most egregious laws of us.gov.

As Mencken said:
Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.
A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.
That SCOTUS hasn't overturned them yet is a sure sign there are no "liberals" left on SCOTUS.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:27 pm
by Vonz90
D5CAV wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:46 am
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws are some of the most egregious laws of us.gov.

As Mencken said:
Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.
A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.
That SCOTUS hasn't overturned them yet is a sure sign there are no "liberals" left on SCOTUS.
I agree they should be abolished or severely limited but I do both want SCOTUS just pulling it out if their ass either.

Unfortunate it has been around for longer than the republic, but we can abolish it or limit it to when a criminal conviction has occurred (of which 6 states have done so).

One of my biggest needs with the Left is the desire to use the courts to circumvent political processes. I will not support doing likewise.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 4:45 am
by D5CAV
Vonz90 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:27 pm
I agree they should be abolished or severely limited but I do both want SCOTUS just pulling it out if their ass either.

Unfortunate it has been around for longer than the republic, but we can abolish it or limit it to when a criminal conviction has occurred (of which 6 states have done so).

One of my biggest needs with the Left is the desire to use the courts to circumvent political processes. I will not support doing likewise.
According to the US Constitution, the Supreme Court is not supposed to legislate. It was the "Warren" court that began that practice after Eisenhower put former Senator Earl Warren on the Supreme Court, an act that he later regretted.

However, Civil Asset Forfeiture laws were put in place by the legislature. It is up to the courts to determine whether those laws are constitutional or unconstitutional. IANAL, but even my layman's reading of the US Constitution says that these laws are unconstitutional.

To argue that your property does not get due process rights because your property is not you, is BS. That's like saying the us.gov can take your food and water and put you in a box without charging you with a crime or giving you the right to defend yourself, but they didn't kill you, so no harm/ no foul. BS on that.

Maybe Bill Gates of Jeff Bezos won't miss $20,000 cash, but for many people, that is the difference between keeping a restaurant or a car repair shop in business. Losing that money means they can't pay payroll, or payroll taxes (now another crime), or property taxes (yet another crime). These laws are ruining people's lives. They are taking people on the edge of survival and turning them into homeless. This is beyond unconstitutional, this is evil.

Yes, I know there are "good cops", maybe some on this board. But, if those "good cops" don't put some brakes on the po-po who do this civil asset forfeiture, no-one is going to remember who was the "good cop" when the revolution comes. They'll just remember it was someone in blue who ripped them off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr2oItXC1eM

As Lehto said, in most countries, if someone with a gun takes your stuff, that's called armed robbery.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 7:41 pm
by Vonz90
D5CAV wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 4:45 am
Vonz90 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:27 pm
I agree they should be abolished or severely limited but I do both want SCOTUS just pulling it out if their ass either.

Unfortunate it has been around for longer than the republic, but we can abolish it or limit it to when a criminal conviction has occurred (of which 6 states have done so).

One of my biggest needs with the Left is the desire to use the courts to circumvent political processes. I will not support doing likewise.
According to the US Constitution, the Supreme Court is not supposed to legislate. It was the "Warren" court that began that practice after Eisenhower put former Senator Earl Warren on the Supreme Court, an act that he later regretted.

However, Civil Asset Forfeiture laws were put in place by the legislature. It is up to the courts to determine whether those laws are constitutional or unconstitutional. IANAL, but even my layman's reading of the US Constitution says that these laws are unconstitutional.

To argue that your property does not get due process rights because your property is not you, is BS. That's like saying the us.gov can take your food and water and put you in a box without charging you with a crime or giving you the right to defend yourself, but they didn't kill you, so no harm/ no foul. BS on that.

Maybe Bill Gates of Jeff Bezos won't miss $20,000 cash, but for many people, that is the difference between keeping a restaurant or a car repair shop in business. Losing that money means they can't pay payroll, or payroll taxes (now another crime), or property taxes (yet another crime). These laws are ruining people's lives. They are taking people on the edge of survival and turning them into homeless. This is beyond unconstitutional, this is evil.

Yes, I know there are "good cops", maybe some on this board. But, if those "good cops" don't put some brakes on the po-po who do this civil asset forfeiture, no-one is going to remember who was the "good cop" when the revolution comes. They'll just remember it was someone in blue who ripped them off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr2oItXC1eM

As Lehto said, in most countries, if someone with a gun takes your stuff, that's called armed robbery.
I agree that it should be eliminated, but it is a very long standing practice that even predates the Constitution. The founders clearly did not think they banned it, because they let it continue. Therefore I do not consider a SCOTUS fix the correct path.

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 5:46 pm
by D5CAV
Vonz90 wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 7:41 pm
I agree that it should be eliminated, but it is a very long standing practice that even predates the Constitution. The founders clearly did not think they banned it, because they let it continue. Therefore I do not consider a SCOTUS fix the correct path.
Here is the text of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution as ratified in 1789:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This was actually the practice under British common law predating the Constitution under the Magna Carta, Clause 39:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.
Can you provide some documentation to support your assertion that the practice of civil asset forfeiture is Constitutional or pre-dates the US Constitution?

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 11:02 pm
by Weetabix
Moderately tangential, but a good read:
https://mises.org/library/anarchists-progress-0

Good quotes:
Government is merely a device for taking money out of one person's pocket and putting it into another's.
It is a noteworthy fact, indeed, concerning all that has happened since then, that if in any given circumstances one went on the assumption that they (government) were a professional-criminal class, one could predict with accuracy what they would do and what would happen; while on any other assumption one could predict almost nothing.
Everyone knows that the State claims and exercises the monopoly of crime that I spoke of a moment ago, and that it makes this monopoly as strict as it can. It forbids private murder, but itself organizes murder on a colossal scale. It punishes private theft, but itself lays unscrupulous hands on anything it wants, whether the property of citizen or of alien. There is, for example, no human right, natural or constitutional, that we have not seen nullified by the United States government. Of all the crimes that are committed for gain or revenge, there is not one that we have not seen it commit — murder, mayhem, arson, robbery, fraud, criminal collusion, and connivance. On the other hand, we have all remarked the enormous relative difficulty of getting the State to effect any measure for the general welfare.
Written in 1927. How many more examples of theft, murder, collusion, and arson could we find since then?

Re: Government Theft

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 11:57 pm
by Vonz90
D5CAV wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 5:46 pm
Vonz90 wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 7:41 pm
I agree that it should be eliminated, but it is a very long standing practice that even predates the Constitution. The founders clearly did not think they banned it, because they let it continue. Therefore I do not consider a SCOTUS fix the correct path.
Here is the text of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution as ratified in 1789:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
This was actually the practice under British common law predating the Constitution under the Magna Carta, Clause 39:
No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.
Can you provide some documentation to support your assertion that the practice of civil asset forfeiture is Constitutional or pre-dates the US Constitution?
The early Congress wrote forfeiture laws based on British maritime law to help federal tax collectors collect customs duties, which financed most of the expenses of the federal government in the early days of the republic. Seizures allowed government to confiscate property from citizens who failed to pay taxes or customs duties. The Supreme Court upheld these forfeiture statutes in situations where it was virtually impossible to get hold of guilty persons on the high seas while possible to get hold of their property. During much of the 19th century there was not much attention paid to forfeiture laws.

https://www.forbes.com/2011/06/08/prope ... iture.html