321–330 of 455 posts
When the Heritage Foundation[1] and the ACLU [2] are both against it, you know it's really bad. [1] http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/03/civil-asset... [2] https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-po...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if I wrap my (virtual) money in a simple script that allows it to defend itself by hiring a lawyer or, at least, contacting me?
Even if the money were sentient and capable of arguing for itself and defending its own case better than a good lawyer, here's what would happen: You can only authorize a legal person to use computer equipment. It is impossible to authorize a pile of money to use computer equipment. Therefore any computer equipment that is used by the pile of money (including that of the owner of the money) is used without consent, a…
This sounds like the beginning of a modern day Robin Hood movie.
Robin Hood did not steal from the poor, if I remember correctly.
It takes a while for Robin to show up, and it seems that in real life, this will never be the case - as $3.9 billion worth of seizures is going to motivate the cops and Feds to fight any changes to this legislation tooth and nail.
Civil forfeiture rules are disgusting. Sadly there are plenty of stories out there like this, people have lost their homes, cars and livelihoods because of these draconian laws around asset forfeiture. The circumstances under which your property can be taken are incredibly overreaching and unfair. There have been situations where people have had their homes taken away for ridiculous situations like this one: http://w…
I understand the claim that people with money could just use it all to buy a one way ticket to nowhere and never be seen again. But it seems to me that there's a very very wide line between "Use your money to keep doing bad things" and "We don't know if you're guilty but we're going to take all your money anyway and good luck with those legal costs" Certainly putting all of their assets into escrow and only allowing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has its problems but I think your perception is greatly exaggerated. Let me tell you how I believe those scenarios would play out- 1. Patent trolls have no political clout. Zero chance of police arresting someone on their behalf (let alone them calling police to request this). Patents are a civil matter, not criminal. 2. I have not heard of the US interrogating any suspected Ukraine-invasion fighters. 3. Musli…
>> Muslim friends could bring you more scrutiny. But they'd have to be pretty dirty to warrant that much attention on you. I haven't heard one case of someone being taken to a secret prison just to be convinced to turn spy. What about this? http://www.thelocal.se/20120419/40368 >> If you're taken to a supposed "secret prison", you're probably there to stay. Okay, thank you very much, I'm staying home then.
That article was about the US treating a Muslim terribly. That happens, and unfortunately it seems to happen very often, and with little justifying evidence. What I'm saying is that I haven't heard it happening to a friend of a Muslim, which was the original scenario.
>> Okay, thank you very much, I'm staying home then.
My comment was made tongue in cheek. Secret prisons on US soil are near unheard of, but if they do exist I'm assuming only very high profile targets would be sent there. If they are taking low level suspects there for interrogation and releasing them, it wouldn't be secret for very long. My point is, the scenario is bad spy novel material, and doesn't remotely reflect reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't this just mean that the will rob you _and_ additionally charge you with some made-up crime and let you rot in jail until you sign the plea deal?
There's a difference between being charged and convicted. If the text is correct, they can't rob you until you've been convicted of a crime in a court of law. So that means while you rot in jail under a fake charge you at least still have your stuff. Which you will then start to sell off so you can afford the legal defense required to fight the false charges. A person can be found innocent of all charges but still be…
And say the false charge was one with a social stigma, say child molestation. Now not only are you financially wiped out, not only have you lost your job, but your name is now tied with a crime which people will often not care if you were found not guilty (or even found innocent). And the only thing you can do to stop it is to say a prayer that you aren't going to be the next one wrongly charged.
I really think we need to start using the word "steal" in headlines like this. "How the DEA stole a young man's life savings..." I remember when this was passed (yes I was alive way back in the Reagan era). I was astounded because I had just learned the concept of due process. I knew then that this was going to be bad, in fact, I was outraged then. This policy is the one that is a litmus test for me. You can't claim…
Thats horrifying. Please, if you haven't already, publish this somewhere. This is something that needs to be shared.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand the claim that people with money could just use it all to buy a one way ticket to nowhere and never be seen again. But it seems to me that there's a very very wide line between "Use your money to keep doing bad things" and "We don't know if you're guilty but we're going to take all your money anyway and good luck with those legal costs" Certainly putting all of their assets into escrow and only allowing…
Can I just lock up all of some politician's fund right before an election and only allow access to fight the case which will likely take months? Can I do the same with a business? A multinational corporation? Freeze up all the assets of a bank and deny access to funds for any reason including payroll while we investigate? Where do we draw the line?
Yes, actually. It's a standard tactic that was used in, eg, the prosecution of Michael Milken.
It's also nice if you can get some kind of tax angle going so you can threaten the target's wife as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Muslim friends could bring you more scrutiny. But they'd have to be pretty dirty to warrant that much attention on you. I haven't heard one case of someone being taken to a secret prison just to be convinced to turn spy. What about this? http://www.thelocal.se/20120419/40368 >> If you're taken to a supposed "secret prison", you're probably there to stay. Okay, thank you very much, I'm staying home then.
>> What about this? That article was about the US treating a Muslim terribly. That happens, and unfortunately it seems to happen very often, and with little justifying evidence. What I'm saying is that I haven't heard it happening to a friend of a Muslim, which was the original scenario. >> Okay, thank you very much, I'm staying home then. My comment was made tongue in cheek. Secret prisons on US soil are near unhear…
But they have rich guys behind them. What if they decide to make "an example" of me, to scare everyone in the US and abroad and convince them to give in and just pay extortion money to them? Right know every non-US company just ignores them and that's huge potential money to be made. It cannot be done through European courts for instance but they could use another intimidation tactic like making the IT community know that everyone who doesn't pay to the trolls will be arrested if he ever crosses the US border. That would be a very profitable venture.
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…
The internet happened. We are no less corrupt than we ever were. We are just more obvious about it now because of the internet. People always think, "oh, things were so much better back in the day". In reality, no, they weren't. It was just different. Back in the day, we wouldn't let blacks use the same bathroom or water fountain. Now we steal their money. It is the same America it always was. We just have more peopl…
Reagan raised taxes when he had to. His scions stoutly refuse in his name. Nixon created the EPA. It is definitely worse now. The right is more right; the left is more right.