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

101–110 of 286 posts

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

#101

Post by romwell »

core-questions wrote: post #65
3pt14159 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

> 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. One big problem with this approach is that it basically pretends that the American citizenry is interchangeable with those of the countries you mentioned. It's not. Identity politics…

>Metaphor

>small network

The population of the EU is 741.4 million, the area is 1,707,642 sq miles. There are quite a few things that are prevalent in the EU, and are nonexistent in the US (public healthcare and higher education, for starters; throw public transportation into the mix, and have a party).

Don't pretend the EU is Norway.

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

#102

Post by abstrakraft »

orf wrote: post #77
seibelj wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Vile hate speech” can cut both ways unfortunately. Both of us agree that racism is a bad thing. But the American South during Jim Crow declared progressive speech as “hate speech” and tried to ban it.[0] So it’s better to not empower the government to decide what is hate and what isn’t, or you may elect a government that decides what you say is hate speech. [0] “As we have seen, during the days of slavery and later…

> So it’s better to not empower the government to decide what is hate and what isn’t The government cannot just arbitrarily expand hate speech to include something which is patently not hate speech. The courts would not uphold it, neither would the judiciary or the public at large.

10 years ago, I would have argued the same about the gov't just arbitrarily expanding asset seizure laws, but here we are.

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

#103

Post by mnm1 »

So the police steal as much as everyone else combined, but it's still only a few bad apples? Every last beat cop on up (especially if they are part of a union) is a bad, rotten apple. Every single one of these cops are propping up ridiculous systems of mass theft and murder orchestrated by their colleagues and their counterparts in prosecutors' offices. These people have no concept of justice or fairness or serving or protecting. I truly think the US would be better off without official police that's how detrimental they are to our society. They are one of the few groups that I can truly say keep our society from being civilized.

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

#104

Post by brazzledazzle »

wetpaws wrote: post #78
iforgotpassword wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't wrap my head around how you can see it as positive that these kind of actions would go unpunished, in the name of "freedom". If I were harassed and bullied I'd not feel very free, but rather anxious, threatened, depressed. I'm quite happy my government takes measures to assure a certain level of personal safety, both physical and psychological.

I would prefer being harrased and bullied rather than having to live in a country that has a legal power to punish me for what I say.

The US does have that legal power so it seems to be more about where you draw the line.

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

#105

Post by jryan49 »

cf498 wrote: post #44

I thought civil asset forfeiture was outlawed around 2014/2015. Looking closer it seems that was only in a few states. I found this map from 2015 https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7195521/c... Has much changed since then?

edit: Any changes to these laws would not apply due to the border search exception.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

The supreme court basically decided you have no rights at the border.

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

#106

Post by orf »

ra1n85 wrote: post #94
orf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A thousand times this. I'm not saying the UK is some shining beacon of how to run a country but I do think overall our governmental systems are pretty sensible . I think being sensible might be a stereotypical English trait, but it's true. For example you have to comply with the spirit of a law, not the exact text. Also our QC's are pretty level headed and the same goes for our police force. Nobody is overly nitpicky…

I don't consider arresting and immediately sentencing an individual to 13 months in prison for broadcasting outside of a public trial to be sensible in the least. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/05/29...

I think your missing the context here, and falling for clickbaity anger inducing headlines.

He had a previous suspended sentence for filming inside a court a couple of months earlier. He then thought "hey, you know what's a good idea? Disobeying a judge's direct no-reporting order (to maintain the integrity of the trial) literally right outside the freaking courthouse.

I consider not giving him a slap on the wrist pretty sensible.

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

#107

Post by hdifhidhr »

orf wrote: post #96
tmmyrobinson wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tommy Robinson Your press isn't even aloud to speak about him. The UK is dystopian

You mean the vile idiot who potentially ruined an ongoing trial by broadcasting sensitive details all over facebook directly outside the court , which was widely and thoroughly reported by the UK press? I would check where you are getting your facts from.

Of course people will defend big brother, that's not especially surprising just disheartening.

Meanwhile a man goes to jail for 13 months for speaking about potential child grooming, rapist gang. He was sent to jail in the period of 6 hours all during a government enforced media blackout.

So what you think him vile, speaking about a public trial doesn't send any Americans to jail for 13 months. I would check where you Get your ethics from.

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

#108

Post by jacob019 »

tracker1 wrote: post #10

I absolutely hate even the idea of "Civil Asset Forfeiture." It's even more of a bullshit legal construct than a non-living entity having first amendment rights. It's clearly a 4th Amendment violation and deserves to be challenged. I'd be okay with freezing assets for up to say 3 months while formal charges are filed, but just taking them forever is fucking bullshit.

It is outrageous. We need a legislative fix.

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

#109

Post by orf »

ra1n85 wrote: post #99
orf wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the vile idiot who potentially ruined an ongoing trial by broadcasting sensitive details all over facebook directly outside the court , which was widely and thoroughly reported by the UK press? I would check where you are getting your facts from.

Your "media" was gagged - completely unable to speak about the arrest, sentencing, and secret imprisoning of one of your fellow citizens.

Until that was immediately challenged and sensibly lifted 3 days later. It was only introduced as an extension to the already existing reporting restrictions on the trial that he broke.

The judge quite sensibly didn't want that case, sure to get lots of attention, to rub off on his ongoing court case which has existing reporting restrictions.

I'm also sure America could teach us a lot about gag orders though. Stick national security infront of it and then all freedom goes out the window?

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

#110

Post by mnm1 »

warent wrote: post #52

A huge problem here is that the government has zero skin in the game. Random people working for some three letter agency are able to plunge you into a bureaucratic labyrinth at the flick of a wrist, and even violate their own guidelines with an extremely low probability of accountability or repercussion. For example: > Under federal forfeiture law, the government was required to initiate a forfeiture case within 90 d…

You start holing these cops personally accountable for this or any of the massive amounts of other disgusting actions they commit on a daily basis and I guarantee this fixes itself overnight. Cop murders someone, electric chair. Cops steals money, they pay back their entire life savings. It's about time we hold public servants to a higher set of standards rather than a lower one. If only there were such incentives, they'd be guaranteed to work. But there are no consequences to police even for murder, let alone theft.
Post reply on HN