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

331–340 of 455 posts

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

#331

Post by Lawtonfogle »

thedufer wrote: post #42
itistoday2 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am concerned that by calling it "civil forfeiture" this article is using language to mask a very basic crime. What was described in this article is called stealing or theft. To call it anything else is to mask and downplay what was done to this man. It is to enable the very act that was committed. George Carlin observed this as a dangerous trend in our language: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuEQixrBKCc Call it "…

Civil forfeiture isn't "soft language", it's a precise legal term. You may not agree with the principle (I certainly don't), but calling it theft is no different from a libertarian doing the same with taxation.

Under some legal systems I can execute a homosexual for merely being a homosexual. But don't you dare call that murder.

Under some legal systems you can own a sex slave, but don't you dare call it rape.

Under some legal systems the government can take what they want because the law allows them, but don't you dare call it theft.

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

#332

Post by Lawtonfogle »

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.

How about 'taxation may be theft'? Depending upon how it is done and how much of a tax there is compared to the benefits.

For example, a one time tax of 30% of all bank accounts would be considered theft. Paying a gas tax to care for the road you use would not.

Also, some of the corrupt dealings of Congress would be theft from the government, and since that raises taxes on the individuals, I think it would be reasonable to consider it theft.

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

#333

Post by Lawtonfogle »

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.

Does one agree to civil forfeiture by continuing to live where it is legal?

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

#334

Post by rebootthesystem »

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…

What's happened to our country is the equivalent of "death by a thousand cuts". I place blame on having devolved into a system where we have professional politicians and voters who are either apathetic, under-informed or both.

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

#335

Post by cbsmith »

tsotha wrote: post #125
cbsmith wrote: post #117

"Asset forfeiture is lucrative for the DEA. According to their latest notification of seized goods, updated Monday, agents have seized well over $38 million dollars' worth of cash and goods from people in the first few months of this year." Umm... $38 million in three months works out to about 5% of the DEA's operating budget. If your revenue is 5% of your burn rate, that's not exactly lucrative. This is money that,…

The DEA isn't a company. They already get a budget from the treasury and shouldn't be behaving like a profit-making concern. "Lucrative" is the right word.

> The DEA isn't a company.

That's exactly my point. Not being a company, the notion of what is "lucrative" for the DEA is quite different.

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

#336

Post by leap_ahead »

worklogin wrote: post #316
leap_ahead wrote: post #221

Russian citizen here. This sort of things I have regularly been hearing about the US over the last decade make me really sad. Some 20 years ago America was a symbol of civil liberties for us. I considered one day maybe going there to work and live. A few years ago I still entertained an idea of going there for an internship. Today I'd be scared to go there even as a tourist or on a short business trip. Let's say I go…

Likewise, I'd never go to Russia, because unlike in the US, I might get swept up and accused of being a spy, or have my hotel room turned over when they use hidden cameras to determine I'm out of the room. Another example would be to see how long someone could shout obscenities at Putin in front of the Kremlin without getting thrown in the back of a truck. In the US, we have the freedom of press to put out articles l…

>> Another example would be to see how long someone could shout obscenities at Putin in front of the Kremlin without getting thrown in the back of a truck. In the US, we have the freedom of press to put out articles like this.

You are correct. US rates better on the freedom of press. The only problem, the articles like this, do they have any power to change things or is it just talk and talk and nothing gets changed?

>> I'm sure the everyday life of a Russian isn't totally miserable, and the US has its major issues, but I can't think of a single civil-rights issue where Russia is a leader.

We do have free medical service available to everyone and also free higher education. They're not as good as they once were (sometimes terrible) but they are available to everyone.

I'd call these basic human rights, access to medical help and access to education.

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

#337

Post by Lawtonfogle »

patcon wrote: post #85
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 today is theft. You say "theft" like it's the typical "take" act that the word normally implies. It's more like someone stealing $200 and giving you a bicycle you didn't ask for, but you're likely still going to use it anyhow. ie. it's complicated, so it gets a new word :)

The problem is when you agree to give them $10,000 for a new car but get a bicycle instead.

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

#338

Post by cbsmith »

task_queue wrote: post #123
cbsmith wrote: post #117

"Asset forfeiture is lucrative for the DEA. According to their latest notification of seized goods, updated Monday, agents have seized well over $38 million dollars' worth of cash and goods from people in the first few months of this year." Umm... $38 million in three months works out to about 5% of the DEA's operating budget. If your revenue is 5% of your burn rate, that's not exactly lucrative. This is money that,…

When is it ever not nice to have $38m kicking around that isn't pre-allocated and can be used for whatever?

Unlike with local seizures, it can't be used for whatever.

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

#340

Post by kowdermeister »

Qantourisc wrote: post #101

As a potential tourist or traveller (I am not to be fair), I wouldn't risk travelling to the US. I'm not sure if there are actual tourists who feel the same, but I'm sure there are other avoiding the US.

I felt the same, then I reassured myself that I'm more exposed to these news, because simply they are outrageous thus they go viral.

No wonder 100 million tweets don't go viral featuring content like "I waked the dog again" or "Ouch, my nail broke".

Post reply on HN