51–60 of 200 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Especially when one party seemingly champions “civil rights” or “the little guy”, and the other party champions “small government”. And yet a government employee stealing someone’s cash with no justification does not fall under any of those categories.
As mentioned in the tweets, the bipartisan FAIR act is supposed to reform civil asset forfeiture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be reported by the news and people would care. Whereas here we get this reaction: "they seized his money and say he is suspected of being a drug dealer, well then i have nothing to worry about - i am not a drug dealer."
I think the most common reaction is going to be "this guy carried my mortgage worth in cash on his person to the airport, I don't think I'm going to have that problem".
Also, it's not just cash they go after. There are plenty of "State v. Diamond Necklace" or "State v. Various Electronics Valued at Approx. $1000" cases out there.
I'd bet this type of behavior from the government is what causes "domestic terrorism"...not just the "radicals" mentioned in headlines.
I’m not aware of any domestic terror attacks (shootings?) where asset forfeiture has even been raised as a contributing factor. The Las Vegas shooter is kinda-money related in that he was a problem gambler. That’s the closest I can think of. Do you have any citation where this has happened? Because if not, that’s probably a pretty poor “bet” you’re making…
The IRC is distinct from civil asset forfeiture, but they're both obtuse bureaucracies that care not for the individuals they crush.
(idk what's with the downvotes. What I said is pretty factual unless you're like an accountant)
Can't get paid more than 1500 in cash in France. 2000 Pounds is "a lot of money" to exchange in the UK. The limits are suspiciously higher if you're well dressed and stepping out of an expensive car or moving millions. Tells you how pathetically poor the poor really are.
[0] https://www.bloomberglaw.com/product/tax/bloombergtaxnews/da...
[1] https://www.cuna.org/advocacy/actions/grassroot-action-cente...
> Lyon arrived @RDUAirport & gave his bag to @TSA to be scanned. He says he absolutely knew TSA would see the cash, but said he also knew there is no law limiting the amount of cash one can fly with in the U.S. Here's the real problem. Civil asset forfeiture is an extralegal action. It's outside the legal system, which is why it's nearly impossible to get your money back. It's why the legality of what Lyon was doing…
Civil asset forfeiture is an extralegal action. This is categorically wrong . CAF is outside of the criminal legal system, but is very much part of the civil legal system, and the governments loses CAF cases more often than they win them in CAF cases preceding or not involving related criminal cases. (But conversely, the governments almost always win CAF cases that occur after succesful criminal cases involving drugs…
Got a source for that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they are replying to the currency printing hypothetical not the 125,000-dollars-stolen-from-me hypothetical.
I thought they were comparing people’s reactions to news about equifax’s data breach exposing people’s social and other identifying info to news about the government stealing from people via civil asset forfeiture.
Let's step back and pretend like the TSA/police never engage in civil asset forfeiture in the first place. That issue aside, this is still a colossally stupid way to make a transaction. A thousand bad outcomes that are possibly more likely than this scenario could have happened. The bag could have been lost in the taxi, lost by the airline, stolen by a passerby, left at home, and the list goes on. Has this guy ever h…
[0]https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-customs-agent...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Especially when one party seemingly champions “civil rights” or “the little guy”, and the other party champions “small government”. And yet a government employee stealing someone’s cash with no justification does not fall under any of those categories.
As mentioned in the tweets, the bipartisan FAIR act is supposed to reform civil asset forfeiture.
It's surreal to me how little political or public support there is for ending these kinds of egregious government overreaches.
I don’t think regular voters like the policy; they just don’t have any input. Plus there is only so much bandwidth for legislative process, and that’s pretty log-jammed by some hot topic issues lately.