Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 286 posts

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#11

Post by tracker1 »

martin1975 wrote: post #9

I come from a country that borders Albania... Albania has a 60% muslim population, and given our current administration and mood toward islam, it is highly doubtful they were after his money but rather after something that went off on their 'threat to national security' radar. Could be a mistaken identity too, it's not unheard of .. many names on those watch lists sound similar or are not the same person at all. I'm…

Civil asset forfeiture does not return anything without a fight... it's a guilty until proven innocent system. It's been a big problem with anyone carrying even a few hundred dollars in a LOT of places in the US. It needs a Supreme Court smackdown is what it needs.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#12

Post by rootsudo »

martin1975 wrote: post #9

I come from a country that borders Albania... Albania has a 60% muslim population, and given our current administration and mood toward islam, it is highly doubtful they were after his money but rather after something that went off on their 'threat to national security' radar. Could be a mistaken identity too, it's not unheard of .. many names on those watch lists sound similar or are not the same person at all. I'm…

No, most forfeiture is not returned to the victim.

Because it's not innocent until declared guilty, it's guilty until declared innocent. Forfeiture does not follow human vs USA. It's 56,000 $ VS USA.

At Airports you waive your right to search protection.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#14

Post by seibelj »

It amazes me when people think the government should be the go-to solution to society's problems. The government can indeed be used for good, and it has solved many problems, and regulations can be a good thing. But government should be applied very carefully, and probably as the last solution, after we see the failures of non-government solutions.

The government is all powerful. They can destroy any business, destroy any life, and seize all assets and livelihood if they desire to, even in America. But at least in America it is possible to sue the government and maybe rectify the situation, but you have to be wealthy or get a powerful ally like the Washington Post on your side.

If it upsets you that the US government is able to hurt an immigrant like is discussed in this article, then you should take a very skeptical view of government actions and also people who advocate giving the government more power. After all, many people who loved Obama's expansion of executive authority now recoil as the enemy party's control of the government reverses his non-congressional approved decisions.

The more power you give to the government, the less power the citizenry has.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#15

Post by tracker1 »

brianbreslin wrote: post #8

Is there anywhere for someone to learn about the process that exists to RECOVER civil asset forfeiture funds?

You have to sue the government body that took your funds. Get a good lawyer and pray, basically.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#16

Post by tracker1 »

seibelj wrote: post #14

It amazes me when people think the government should be the go-to solution to society's problems. The government can indeed be used for good, and it has solved many problems, and regulations can be a good thing. But government should be applied very carefully, and probably as the last solution, after we see the failures of non-government solutions. The government is all powerful. They can destroy any business, destro…

Not just immigrants... for years, various jurisdictions in the US would shakedown people passing through. If you had more than a couple hundred in cash, kiss it goodbye. There's been a little tightening of its' use in the past 2-3 years, but it needs to go away.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#18

Post by 3pt14159 »

seibelj wrote: post #14

It amazes me when people think the government should be the go-to solution to society's problems. The government can indeed be used for good, and it has solved many problems, and regulations can be a good thing. But government should be applied very carefully, and probably as the last solution, after we see the failures of non-government solutions. The government is all powerful. They can destroy any business, destro…

Not last. Not first. Not all powerful. Not feckless.

Americans act like their government is representative of governments. It isn't. They act like everything needs to be invented there. It doesn't. They believe that America is the greatest country in the world. It isn't.

If people in America just stopped to look around at how other countries do things they'd be doubly as well run. Most parts of Europe, Japan, Canada, and many other places are well run and have a great deal of governmental involvement. America is hobbled by its own broken political system that nobody would replicate if they were starting from scratch today.

It's essentially the PHP of government systems. Dominant, but broken.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#19

Post by wvenable »

seibelj wrote: post #14

It amazes me when people think the government should be the go-to solution to society's problems. The government can indeed be used for good, and it has solved many problems, and regulations can be a good thing. But government should be applied very carefully, and probably as the last solution, after we see the failures of non-government solutions. The government is all powerful. They can destroy any business, destro…

The problem I have with this line of argument is that's used to excuse the government of these kinds of actions. Once you believe that government is simply incapable then you stop demanding that it becomes any better.

Even what you describe, limiting the power of government, is a governmental solution. You simply have to elect people who want to make the system better rather than those who want to tear it down. It's easy to say government doesn't work and do nothing.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#20

Post by refurb »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #17

Here's something that gets me... A lot of Second Amendment advocates say we need the right to bear arms to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. Well...here's your tyranny. Now where's that armed uprising?

I don't know of any 2nd amendment advocate who suggests bearing arms against the government as an ideal first option.

If you want to see it in action in another scenario, go look up The Bundy Ranch Standoff.[1]

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff

Post reply on HN