Live data from Hacker News

Stop and Seize

washingtonpost.com

31–40 of 212 posts

Re: Stop and Seize

#31
The fourth amendment, protection against unlawful search and seizure, was put into the constitution as a direct consequence of the very laws that civil forfeiture was based upon. That makes me sad. How can we, as a society, function in which we've incentivized our own police force to take property from our citizens without proof of a crime? It just doesn't make sense.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_...

Re: Stop and Seize

#32
post #24

This story is so unbelievably biased and one-sided, it confirms my suspicions of the value of the Washington Post anymore. Carrying $75K in cash around should raise anyone's suspicions as to the purpose, no matter what the carrier claims. Think about it. Why would YOU carry $75K in cash? The obvious and well known reasons are, it's the most secure way to fund drug and terrorist cells without leaving a trail. The Post…

Look, I think most reasonable people would agree the Washington Post is pretty much a joke at this point. However, I have toe vehemently disagree with your rationale. This line of thinking has to stop. Just because YOU can't think of any reason to carry "large" sums of money doesn't mean there IS no legitimate reason. Innocent until proven guilty, all that jazz. "Think about it. Why would YOU, wear sagging jeans?" Al…

Tell me a legitimate reason to carry thousands of dollars of cash around. While some, here, will think of outlier reasons and point to a few "two thousand dollar" situations, the point of the whole thing is that there are a multitude of tens and hundreds of thousands and millions in cash that ARE stopped and picked up all the time for illegal reasons and the POST (and posters here) are ignoring that fact. (Except for the one line I show in my other post.)

Ignoring the other side of the story is what's going on here.

Re: Stop and Seize

#33

This story is so unbelievably biased and one-sided, it confirms my suspicions of the value of the Washington Post anymore. Carrying $75K in cash around should raise anyone's suspicions as to the purpose, no matter what the carrier claims. Think about it. Why would YOU carry $75K in cash? The obvious and well known reasons are, it's the most secure way to fund drug and terrorist cells without leaving a trail. The Post…

We don't, generally, forbid things that are merely suspicious. You should be considered innocent unless proven guilty. This is a basic pre-requisite for a fair and open justice system.

What the Washington Post is talking about here is money taken from people who have not been convicted of anything. Money taken, in the first instance, without recourse to a court of law. Money taken, often, from people without the will or resources to have it overturned. Do not underestimate how powerless people feel in the face of overwhelming authority and how that powerlessness means that they fail to assert their rights. Even those that have the money returned are subject to interest and opportunity costs with returns often taking months.

Only one-sixth of seizures are challenged. This means that approximately $450m every year are taken from people who do have the means to appeal and fight back. Assuming that unreasonable (not the same thing as unsuccessful) appeals are balanced by those without the means to appeal, you are punishing innocent people by half a billion dollars in fines every year. That they may have used the money to buy drugs is not an excuse.

If a society is to have a fair and reasonable justice system, that system must err on the side of the innocent and not on the side of its enforcers. Otherwise it creates perverse incentives and encourages subjugation of the populace, fermenting resentment and a system that is not of the populace, but separate to it. That system is not stable and it is not a system that can act as a basis for progression. It is a cauldron for resentment, enmity and eventually revolution. It is not a good way to live.

Re: Stop and Seize

#34

This story is so unbelievably biased and one-sided, it confirms my suspicions of the value of the Washington Post anymore. Carrying $75K in cash around should raise anyone's suspicions as to the purpose, no matter what the carrier claims. Think about it. Why would YOU carry $75K in cash? The obvious and well known reasons are, it's the most secure way to fund drug and terrorist cells without leaving a trail. The Post…

Yeah biased. The police on the other hand are clearly entirely even handed, righteous and fair.

There's always a defender for the indefensible in forums supporting authoritarianism. You carry 75k in cash because:

"That's none of your damn business."

Really that's the reason right up until you have a warrant. Even then it may still be the reason and unless proof is offered it's yours and you keep it. Because Freedom.

It's very common amongst migrant communities who raise funds for business amongst family and friends for one. So that's like 90% of the USA within the last few generations. There are many other reasons, many of which you have never considered. And it still isn't your business or anybody else's right up until probable cause and a warrant. People take it seriously when it happens to them, I believe there was a war fought over that once.

Would you rather the Post biased against you or the courts. 10 months to get your money back, no charges and it costs you your business. You get your money back but not the time you spent, the legal fees, no mention of interest, or compensation and to finally get it you have to promise you won't sue. Yeah you enforce that as police because you know you're in the right, sure. If that were me having my property stolen I'd be saying the post didn't go in nearly hard enough on this criminal behaviour and spent too much time not acknowledging police officers can tell lies and you can't take anything claimed by a police officer as a fact just because he or she said it. Would the word biased cover the racial profile of those stopped? Or do you think that white people aren't involved in drug crime at all?

But you see here's the thing about your rights. They exist or they don't. If someone who "might look like a drug dealer" has no rights to unwarranted search and seizure, neither do you.

HSBC do drug money laundering and the people involved aren't prosecuted because it might result in HSBC losing their banking license. Seriously, that's the reason given. Drug money laundering at the big end goes through banks, there are other banks than HSBC involved. If you want to get warrants to do proper searches to fight drug crime that would be the place to start and devote all spare resources. De-criminalization is a much better bet to start solving these immense problems.

Re: Stop and Seize

#35
post #6

Near the end, they talk about how police can use psychological pressure to keep someone at the side of the road, not telling them they can leave any time the initial traffic stop is over. They then make 'productive' use of that time. Why you should never talk to police: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Judging from the 5 or 6 cops I know personally (neighbors and what not), there's basically nothing you can do if they want something from you.

They will lie or provoke you into doing something, even worse, one of the cops I know had a story about how someone said, "no, you cannot search my vehicle." The cop then asked if he wanted to be arrested for resisting arrest, and the guy gave in because he has no idea what his rights really are. The cop who was telling me seemed pretty smug about it, tricking someone into searching his car...

The point being, it's very hard not to get yourself into a pickle of the police officer really wants you. Most officers have somewhere between 2 - 4 years of formal education, most of which is about how to trick people, not about law. If the police officer suspects you're at fault for anything (or even is just having a bad day and doesn't like your look) he will arrest you.

That being said, always say, "I'm not refusing, but you may not search my car (or persons)" and don't go with them unless you are arrested. Both require them to get a warrant, something they wont do unless they need to. If your pulled over and asked why, always say "no." (fifth amendment right and all).

Finally, always, always, always be super nice and professional. Act innocent and you wont make the officer angry.

Re: Stop and Seize

#36
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, I think most reasonable people would agree the Washington Post is pretty much a joke at this point. However, I have toe vehemently disagree with your rationale. This line of thinking has to stop. Just because YOU can't think of any reason to carry "large" sums of money doesn't mean there IS no legitimate reason. Innocent until proven guilty, all that jazz. "Think about it. Why would YOU, wear sagging jeans?" Al…

Tell me a legitimate reason to carry thousands of dollars of cash around. While some, here, will think of outlier reasons and point to a few "two thousand dollar" situations, the point of the whole thing is that there are a multitude of tens and hundreds of thousands and millions in cash that ARE stopped and picked up all the time for illegal reasons and the POST (and posters here) are ignoring that fact. (Except for…

More than half of all seizures are below $9000 - the amount of money you may use to buy a second-hand car. The amount of money that you may be using to pay for a group holiday. Hell, I brought a couple of thousand dollars in cash with me to the US on holiday a few years back.

You may be doing payroll for a small business that pays cash. You may have collected cash from a door-to-door sales job. Possibly you've withdrawn cash to put down as a deposit on an apartment or house. Maybe you're paying for a course for professional qualifications. Maybe you owe three month's back rent.

I'd reckon that all of these put together are more probable than funding a terrorist cell or setting up a drug deal. I'd certainly not give up my rights to do these things "just in case".

Re: Stop and Seize

#37

I don't see what the problem is. In France if you carry more than 10,000 € in cash, you need to make a custom declaration. It's also illegal to buy something for more than 3,000 € in cash.

You don't see a problem with those laws?

Re: Stop and Seize

#38

This story is so unbelievably biased and one-sided, it confirms my suspicions of the value of the Washington Post anymore. Carrying $75K in cash around should raise anyone's suspicions as to the purpose, no matter what the carrier claims. Think about it. Why would YOU carry $75K in cash? The obvious and well known reasons are, it's the most secure way to fund drug and terrorist cells without leaving a trail. The Post…

My boss carried £40k in cash around once a month for a number of years. It was people's pay on the way from the bank to the company. Imagine the consequences of siezing that. In no way should anyone assume anything. That's a bad precedence to set. And as for me, when I sold my house a few years ago, the buyer paid cash (a suitcase of 15,300 £20 notes). I had to take that to the bank and pay it in, which was suprising…

That last paragraph is fascinating! How did you react to their request to pay cash? How did you count the money to ensure that it was all there - did you sit there and do it when they arrived, or employ someone or did you visit the bank together?

Re: Stop and Seize

#39
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in practice the "fuck you, I know my rights" approach is the worst one. Just take 20 minutes to hide your cash properly and in a friendly voice say "sure officer, go ahead and search." He's not going to find it.

This is terrible advice on multiple levels. Absolutely you shouldn't be leaving the money out in the open, and should probably hide it. You should absolutely NEVER give consent to search your car. You have no idea what a person is capable of until it's too late. I'm not saying the cop will plant something, though it wouldn't be the first time, but you also have NO IDEA what might be in your car accidentally.

You've been watching too many political thrillers. These guys are just sniffing around for low hanging fruit. If you want to get into a one hour bout of flexing nuts with a cop where he gets suspicious and orders a K9 unit and ends up thoroughly tearing apart your car and bags and potentially planting something, knock yourself out. Do the whole citizen lawyer thing. If you want to be on your way with minimal hassle, just disarm the cop and let him be his lazy self. Let him do his cursory thirty second look around and be on your way. This is the reality and many cops will tell you so.

As for having dangerous mystery items in your car, if you don't regularly hang out with low lifes that seems ridiculously improbable. Drugs and weapons are not going to sneak into your vehicle or luggage. To have "no idea" what's in your car it would have to be cluttered with junk and you'd have to parade people through it on a regular basis, so uh, don't do that.

Re: Stop and Seize

#40
It is sad. Yet people like Gavin Seim and Adam Kokesh get a lot of shit for standing up.

"have you seen the video where the guy just keeps repeating, 'Am I being detained? Am I free to go?' what an asshole"

And anyone defending those people is instantly labelled a gun freak.

Post reply on HN