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

How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 455 posts

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#201

Post by Frondo »

titanomachy wrote: post #71
itistoday2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Civil forfeiture isn't "soft language", it's a precise legal term. It is both. > calling it theft is no different from a libertarian doing the same with taxation. Taxation today is theft.

If taxation today is theft, is there a time when it wasn't?

Taxation isn't theft.

The anti-tax crowd is just like the anti-vax crowd. They both want a free ride on the rest of our backs; the anti-vaxers want the benefit of herd immunity, and the anti-taxers want others to pay the cost of living in the modern world.

(*edited to a missing word)

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#202

Post by itistoday2 »

Frondo wrote: post #199
itistoday2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Civil forfeiture isn't "soft language", it's a precise legal term. It is both. > calling it theft is no different from a libertarian doing the same with taxation. Taxation today is theft.

Taxation isn't theft. Taxation is you paying the bill you've incurred for living in this country. You've lived here, gotten some benefit from the services the government provides, and when the bill comes you start saying "theft!! theft!!!"? The anti-tax crowd is the biggest bunch of moochers and freeloaders this side of Wall Street. They're just out for a free ride, leaving the rest of us to pay for it.

Stereotypes and ad hominem don't help the conversation.

I am not "anti-tax". I think taxation is a good idea as it helps a community re-invest in itself. I am anti-theft.

Saying today's taxation is not theft won't change the reality that it is. Nor will downvoting this post change that reality. In fact, barring a change in the definition of the word, there is not a single action in this universe that can change the reality that taking something that belongs to someone else without their permission is theft.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#203

Post by Frondo »

itistoday2 wrote: post #202
Frondo wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxation isn't theft. Taxation is you paying the bill you've incurred for living in this country. You've lived here, gotten some benefit from the services the government provides, and when the bill comes you start saying "theft!! theft!!!"? The anti-tax crowd is the biggest bunch of moochers and freeloaders this side of Wall Street. They're just out for a free ride, leaving the rest of us to pay for it.

Stereotypes and ad hominem don't help the conversation. I am not "anti-tax". I think taxation is a good idea as it helps a community re-invest in itself. I am anti-theft. Saying today's taxation is not theft won't change the reality that it is. Nor will downvoting this post change that reality. In fact, barring a change in the definition of the word, there is not a single action in this universe that can change the r…

You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here.

Taxes aren't theft any more than the check at the end of a restaurant meal is theft.

In both cases, you agree to pay something in exchange for something (a meal, a functioning government, etc).

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#204

Post by itistoday2 »

Frondo wrote: post #203
itistoday2 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stereotypes and ad hominem don't help the conversation. I am not "anti-tax". I think taxation is a good idea as it helps a community re-invest in itself. I am anti-theft. Saying today's taxation is not theft won't change the reality that it is. Nor will downvoting this post change that reality. In fact, barring a change in the definition of the word, there is not a single action in this universe that can change the r…

You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here. Taxes aren't theft any more than the check at the end of a restaurant meal is theft. In both cases, you agree to pay something in exchange for something (a meal, a functioning government, etc).

> You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here.

If we were free to move to a country where we agreed with the laws you might be right. That's not reality though.

We are not (currently) free to choose how we pay taxes in any country and our freedom to move from one country to another is restricted.

So, sorry, I never agreed to pay these taxes, I have little say in how they're used, and I have no alternatives except to go to prison. That's not freedom. That's simply coercion and theft.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#205

Post by fsck--off »

hackercurious wrote: post #176
imroot wrote: post #10

While civil forfeiture is scary, my (very very brief) stint doing criminal law as a public defender showed me that there's also a bigger side of this -- seizing the assets of individuals who are charged with a crime so that they cannot attain private counsel, make bail, or receive any creature comforts while incarcerated. What will generally happen is that after sitting in jail for 120+ days, they'll jump at any oppo…

The State of New Mexico has just banned asset forfeiture. HB 560, introduced by New Mexico Rep. Zachary Cook and passed unanimously in the legislature, replaces civil asset forfeiture with criminal forfeiture, which requires a conviction of a person as a prerequisite to losing property tied to a crime. The new law means that New Mexico now has the strongest protections against wrongful asset seizures in the country.…

The WaPo article (the submission) mentions this bill, but finishes:

"But New Mexico's law only affects state law enforcement officials. As a result, in New Mexico — and everywhere else, for that matter — DEA agents will be able to board your train, ask you where you're going and take all your cash if they don't like your story, all without ever charging you with a crime."

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#206

Post by Frondo »

itistoday2 wrote: post #204
Frondo wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here. Taxes aren't theft any more than the check at the end of a restaurant meal is theft. In both cases, you agree to pay something in exchange for something (a meal, a functioning government, etc).

> You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here. If we were free to move to a country where we agreed with the laws you might be right. That's not reality though. We are not (currently) free to choose how we pay taxes in any country and our freedom to move from one country to another is restricted. So, sorry, I never agreed to pay these taxes, I have little say in how they're used, and I have no alternatives exce…

You are free to move to another country. The fact that no other country meets your very specific requirements doesn't mean that you are not obligated to pay for living in this one.

If no automobile maker will sell you the exact car you want, that does not grant you the right to take a car without paying for it.

So, yes, you do agree to pay these taxes by continuing to live here.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#207

Post by itistoday2 »

Frondo wrote: post #206
itistoday2 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You agree to pay taxes by continuing to live here. If we were free to move to a country where we agreed with the laws you might be right. That's not reality though. We are not (currently) free to choose how we pay taxes in any country and our freedom to move from one country to another is restricted. So, sorry, I never agreed to pay these taxes, I have little say in how they're used, and I have no alternatives exce…

You are free to move to another country. The fact that no other country meets your very specific requirements doesn't mean that you are not obligated to pay for living in this one. If no automobile maker will sell you the exact car you want, that does not grant you the right to take a car without paying for it. So, yes, you do agree to pay these taxes by continuing to live here.

> You are free to move to another country.

Please explain how I can do that. I would actually like to move to Switzerland, could you explain how I can freely do that as everything I've researched indicates it's neither free nor possible in any reasonable amount of time. If not Switzerland I'll settle for some other country where I can live freely and be safe from coercion.

> If no automobile maker will sell you the exact car you want...

Nobody is forcing me to buy the car with the threat of prison if I don't, and I do not need a car to survive. I do need to live someplace however.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#208

Post by bcook »

yarou wrote: post #183
anigbrowl wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because what's right and what's sensible are two different things. Bear in mind that you could also get robbed the old-fashioned way - if you reach into your envelope full of money to withdraw any cash there's a small but non-zero possibility that someone will notice and get the idea to take it for themselves. This is why people used to carry traveler's checks before plastic became ubiquitous - people know that carry…

I think you are completely missing the point of this article. This isn't about whether or not one should carry large amounts of cash with them. Rather, this is about an abuse of power by a large government entity that doesn't seem to be held accountable for its actions.

Being suspicious of someone carrying 16k in cash across the country to start a music video business seems logical to me... There need to be better examples (of which there are) of governmental abuse before people will care.

I suppose we have the right to be suspicious if we want, but do not be surprised when someone mistakes you for a criminal.

Re: How the DEA took a young man’s life savings without charging him with a crime

#209

Post by Frondo »

itistoday2 wrote: post #207
Frondo wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are free to move to another country. The fact that no other country meets your very specific requirements doesn't mean that you are not obligated to pay for living in this one. If no automobile maker will sell you the exact car you want, that does not grant you the right to take a car without paying for it. So, yes, you do agree to pay these taxes by continuing to live here.

> You are free to move to another country. Please explain how I can do that. I would actually like to move to Switzerland, could you explain how I can freely do that as everything I've researched indicates it's neither free nor possible in any reasonable amount of time. If not Switzerland I'll settle for some other country where I can live freely and be safe from coercion. > If no automobile maker will sell you the e…

You can leave the U.S. whenever you want. The U.S. isn't restricting your ability to leave.

If the country of your choice doesn't permit you to emigrate, that doesn't mean that you're suddenly free from your obligations to whatever country will host you.

Wouldn't that be convenient? "Sir, I don't have to pay taxes. I want to move to Switzerland, but they're full right now, so I can't."

(And the "threat of prison" is some of the dumbest hyperbole out of the antitax crowd--for nearly all cases, they'll simply garnish your wages, or something equally non-freedom-constraining.)

Post reply on HN