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

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

#251

Post by microcolonel » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 1:41 PM UTC

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #135

lewis500 wrote: post #55

Only as I get older do I realize how incredibly bad elements of law enforcement in the US can be, and legally so. Few cops and agents are bad, but it is a system with little filtering, personally or institutionally, of the bad elements. Civil asset forfeiture is overwhelmingly unpopular, but when states try to reform it the law enforcement groups rally around it mightily. Essentially they want the right to steal mone…

I partially disagree with your statement that this is legal behavior by law enforcement. It's one of those situations where IIRC the Supreme Court's relevant ruling from long ago was just plain wrong. I think just about every sane adult agrees that this violates the Bill of Rights, regardless of any SCOTUS opinions to the contrary.

Yeah, it seems to be pretty clear. They justify it on the technicality that they are not charging you, but an inanimate object with no rights; but honestly they could do this with almost anything you own, including your own body, through reasoning which is only slightly more ludicrous.

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

#252

Post by microcolonel » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 1:44 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #246

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,…

The older I get, the more I suspect that the problem isn’t our system, but Americans. Take something like the NYC subway. It’s a disaster while London’s Tube works fine. The usual excuses (not enough money) don’t work—the NYC metro has double the operating costs per passenger trip, even though the systems are very similar. Maybe Americans just aren’t very good at government. This is not so crazy a concept. When I was…

I think a major problem with it is apathy, which is abundant, and can explain most ways government works worse in America (and why there should be less of it). Granted, I still don't agree that things are oh-so-bad in the U.S. Every time we bring up an issue, the Americans and foreigners alike gasp and point fingers, but this sort of stuff happens all over the world, just maybe not this exact problem in other English speaking nations.

What this does show is that we shouldn't expect government approaches which at least somewhat function in other countries to work well in the U.S.

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

#253

Post by dfraser992 » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 1:45 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #246

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,…

The older I get, the more I suspect that the problem isn’t our system, but Americans. Take something like the NYC subway. It’s a disaster while London’s Tube works fine. The usual excuses (not enough money) don’t work—the NYC metro has double the operating costs per passenger trip, even though the systems are very similar. Maybe Americans just aren’t very good at government. This is not so crazy a concept. When I was…

I'm American, but I live in the UK and am currently working on a research project for Network Rail to investigate how machine learning might be used to improve performance. So I've been reading up on rail networks in general.

The Tube is mostly great, but there are issues; the public generally doesn't see them (but I guess you've never been in London at rush hour?). The UK rail network however is a disaster. Privatization has made things worse - organizational chaos because of too many overlapping responsibilities between all the companies / not enough coordination. And the profit motive of course screws up things for what ought to be treated as a public utility. The latest disaster (the re-timetabling of GTR's services) was badly planned, managed, and executed. It's not "government" in general - my opinion is Americans in general are a lot more organized than the British in a fundamental sense.

Europe is one a model of exactly how to run things - but at a certain cost to passengers. There is enough buffer space left in the timetable to deal with possible delays or problems, and so services are relatively infrequent, but on the whole punctual. Thus passengers have to adjust their lives for that. The UK however does not do that - buffer space is eaten up to stick freight trains in whenever possible and any issues with them (plus issues with passenger trains) cascade. And UK passengers have always had train services available at the drop of a hat (metaphorically) - the social cost to move over to the EU style of doing things would make a lot of people very unhappy. The GTR disaster is an example of how socially disruptive changes are, especially when badly managed.

Japan is of course super organized, so they have train services down to the very second. The UK only labels trains as 'late' if they arrive more than 3 minutes late...

As for NYC, yeah, they have a lot of issues. Old tracks, underfunded, but mostly bad management decisions in trying to solve one problem and it snowballs - the NY Times have had some good articles on exactly what is going wrong. It is like no one has been paying attention to all the OR research in this area, but that seems to be normal - the gap between theory and what's actually is done in industry is quite large.

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

#254

Post by rayiner » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 1:54 PM UTC

dfraser992 wrote: post #253

rayiner wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The older I get, the more I suspect that the problem isn’t our system, but Americans. Take something like the NYC subway. It’s a disaster while London’s Tube works fine. The usual excuses (not enough money) don’t work—the NYC metro has double the operating costs per passenger trip, even though the systems are very similar. Maybe Americans just aren’t very good at government. This is not so crazy a concept. When I was…

I'm American, but I live in the UK and am currently working on a research project for Network Rail to investigate how machine learning might be used to improve performance. So I've been reading up on rail networks in general. The Tube is mostly great, but there are issues; the public generally doesn't see them (but I guess you've never been in London at rush hour?). The UK rail network however is a disaster. Privatiz…

> The UK only labels trains as 'late' if they arrive more than 3 minutes late...

In Maryland it’s 5 minutes for commuter trains. For Amtrak it’s 15 minutes for an inter-city train, and up to hours for long haul trains.

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

#255

Post by throwawayjava » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 2:36 PM UTC

core-questions wrote: post #69

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Citation? And Fox News doesn’t count

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit... Get a clue, man. Denying this kind of thing doesn't help anyone, even minority groups you might fear getting tarred by association. If you can ignore the rape of thousands of children because the political ramifications of it make you uncomfortable, you're part of the problem.

Like 8/10ths of that wiki article is about various inquiries, at every level of government, all of which were either by or about the police.

You have a very funny definition of "ignore".

> If you can ignore the rape of thousands of children because the political ramifications of it make you uncomfortable, you're part of the problem.

If everyone who disagrees with your framing "ignores child rape", you're part of the problem.

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

#256

Post by jakelazaroff » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 3:01 PM UTC

opo wrote: post #225

jakelazaroff wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…right. That article bemoans the use of "shouting fire in a crowded theater" as a rhetorical device, but doesn't actually discuss the legality of such speech. (IANAL, but there exists such a thing as depraved indifference murder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depraved-heart_murder )

>...but doesn't actually discuss the legality of such speech. Well, the article discusses the origin of the idea that "shouting fire in a crowded theater" is illegal. It also points out that Brandenburg v. Ohio is the actual relevant decision. For more context on the Brandenberg decision: >...Charles Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan leader, had spoken to group members at a televised Ohio rally. He’d used inflammatory lang…

The death of a human being can certainly be regarded as unlawful. See Michelle Carter's conviction for encouraging Conrad Roy to commit suicide [1] despite the fact that Massachusetts has no law against suicide itself.

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

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

#257

Post by salawat » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 3:49 PM UTC

This is one of the most horrifying stories I've read in a long time.

I have a great deal of trouble even understanding what has gone so catastrophically wrong to even have this practice be a thing. Due process MUST be honored. No excuses are acceptable that "convictions are to hard, we NEED this".

Law enforcement and policing with this kind of discretion, ceases to be policing, protection of, or service to society. I will back the men and women who truly try to execute their duty with due respect and honor to those they are protecting, but institutional mechanisms like this only undermine and weaken the trust the public can have in the government.

I'll come out and say it. I'll accept a drug dealer on every corner before I'll accept the legality and morality of confiscation of assets without due process or with shortcutted due process. Our country survived just fine before the explosion in law enforcement's capability to waltz over civil rights, and it can survive without it now. If you can't get the job done with typical investigative techniques that don't include stomping on or cleverly redefining the scope of the 4th Amendment, then maybe, just maybe you're doing it wrong.

Depriving a citizen of life, liberty, and the fruits of their pursuit of happiness is SUPPOSED to be a long, ardorous task.

Vigilia pretium libertatis est.

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

#258

Post by patrickg_zill » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 4:18 PM UTC

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…

They could in fact file what is called a "Bivens claim", directly against the individual agents involved.

Whether it would make the Feds more cooperative or not, is the question.

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

#259

Post by kardos » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 4:19 PM UTC

vageli wrote: post #248

threatofrain wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the same thing as barring someone for being overqualified, isn't it?

I can't think of many jobs you'd be turned away from for being too smart.

One rationalisation is that hiring someone "too smart" for the work required means that they'll soon become bored and move on, so your effort invested in training them is wasted.

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

#260

Post by JackCh » Sat, Jun 02, 2018, 4:25 PM UTC

manicdee wrote: post #226

JackCh wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree and I strongly discourage you from shooting people. There is still a large portion of the public who don't know what civil forfeiture is or why it's a bad thing. If you want to make a difference the best thing you can do right is educate people.

The soap box has already been used. People don't care. The ballot box has already been used. Both sides either take no action or work to extend the practise. People still don't care. The jury box has already been used, the supreme court has ruled this legal. People still don't care. If you think it's too soon to resort to the ammo box, you need to reevaluate your perspective on the government in the USA. Remember, "a…

The soap box has not been exhausted. It's not something you use once or twice and then give up on. And because the soap box has not been exhausted, the ballot box has necessarily not been employed to the full extent. The ammo box is for truly extreme situations such as when the results of the ballot box are being disregarded and the courts choose not to intervene or are incapable of meaningfully intervening.

Ironically, right now, you are using the soap box and not the ammo box. You're arguing your viewpoint online instead of killing people. That's a good thing, keep at it.