Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 6:02:12 AM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11239
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: outlier

Here is an article with more details about the practice
from 2013 in The New Yorker.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

You not only do not have to be convicted, you don't have to
even be charged. Furthermore it can all start because: You
were driving too close to the line, or You drove in the left
lane for 1/2 mile without passing. Or your son sold $20 worth
of weed while on your front porch, so we are taking your house.
Too bad you are elderly and have cancer.




Who was president then...

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to outlier)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 7:02:01 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		the bigger issue at hand is, is the idea behind the program justifiable and if so, are the problems with it simply a matter of implementation.

and if the problems with the implementation of it cannot get around conflicts of interest, human greed and the desire for power, how does that affect the essence of the idea and what should be/could be done about the obvious pitfalls.

and lastly, how exactly has sessions "expanded the program."

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 7:45:01 AM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		Didn't some one do this thread not that long ago? Sorry i was just reading all of the link article today

I seem to remember saying we have this one over here Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Part 5 of the Act deals with the civil recovery of the proceeds of crime from unconvicted defendants through proceedings in the civil courts (the High Court or, in Scotland, Court of Session).

It includes powers relating to the seizure, detention and forfeiture of cash sums[18] in excess of the 'minimum amount'[19] (currently £1,000).[20] In this context cash is widely defined to include not only banknotes and coins of any currency but also cheques, including travellers' cheques and bank drafts.[21] These proceedings are held in the Magistrates' Court or (in Scotland) before the Sheriff.

Part 5 applies throughout the UK.

Effectively it is a combination of two older acts

If someone transfers their ill-gotten money to say a spouse name (on deeds) martial home, etc i am not sure how it works or if they hide their money too well they effectively have no assets - or assets that can be found.

Which is still different from say a kid getting pulled over for 100 buck dope money and having his car etc seized.

Anyway convicted felons dont get the vote either, or ever again, in America, I think

In the UK erm I dont seem to think a prisoner gets a vote

The UK has a blanket ban on prisoners voting in national and European elections, regardless of the severity of their conviction or the length of their sentence.

To put this in perspective, women are most commonly handed custodial sentences for nonviolent crimes. The most common crime women serving sentences in British prisons have committed is theft.

People who are being detained but have not been convicted of a criminal offence, such as non-payment of TV licence, can vote. People who are in prison on remand and are awaiting trial or sentencing can also vote.

_____________________________

wE arE tHe voiCes,
We SAtuRaTe yOur aLPHA brain WAveS, ThIs is nOt A DrEAm The wiZaRd of Oz, shoES, CaLcuLUs, DECorAtiNG, FrIDGE SProcKeTs, be VeRy sCareDed – SLoBbers,We DeEManDErs Sloowee DAnCiNG, SmOOches – whisper whisper & CaAkEE

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 1:28:16 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
the bigger issue at hand is, is the idea behind the program justifiable and if so, are the problems with it simply a matter of implementation.
and if the problems with the implementation of it cannot get around conflicts of interest, human greed and the desire for power, how does that affect the essence of the idea and what should be/could be done about the obvious pitfalls.
and lastly, how exactly has sessions "expanded the program."


Just like with just about everything, the devil is in the details.

I don't now how Sessions is expanding the program. Is it a worthwhile program? I think it's good to deny those that are breaking the law the fruits of their law breaking. I think most people would agree with that, too. However, what doesn't need to be expanded, but, in reality, contracted, is the number of people who are innocent of any intentional wrongdoing losing their property. If someone buys drugs on my front porch, but I'm not involved, I don't know there is a drug transaction going on, and I wouldn't allow it if I did know, then I shouldn't lose my house simply because it was used by someone else in the commission of a crime.

Does expansion of the program come with any protections for those who wrongfully have their shit taken? I don't know, and I doubt anyone here does. But, let's not let that kind of stuff get in the way of an opportunity to score points against the other side.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 1:45:37 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		It's a "morality war," not a legal issue. Why single out drug offenses?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 1:54:37 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
It's a "morality war," not a legal issue. Why single out drug offenses?


Because it's a good example. The "losing the house" thing happened because of some illicit drug transaction on the front porch, and the owner of the house wasn't involved and claimed to not know the transaction was happening.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 2:01:28 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		At this level, they really shouldn't be at the starting point of planning.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 5:21:14 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		it seems a reasonable way to avoid conflicts of interest and unethical behavior would be to limit the occurrence of any forfeitures to after a conviction and to make it less a "seizure" and more of a jury awarded thing where the state has to make the case for it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 5:27:40 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

it seems a reasonable way to avoid conflicts of interest and unethical behavior would be to limit the occurrence of any forfeitures to after a conviction and to make it less a "seizure" and more of a jury awarded thing where the state has to make the case for it.

I and the Constitution both agree 100%.

If a conviction is required, this is a program that would help tremendously.

As it is, "We The People" is just the first sheet on the roll.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 8:19:19 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
it seems a reasonable way to avoid conflicts of interest and unethical behavior would be to limit the occurrence of any forfeitures to after a conviction and to make it less a "seizure" and more of a jury awarded thing where the state has to make the case for it.


Freezing (or seizing) someone's assets isn't necessarily a bad thing, provided that someone is the one under investigation for the actual wrongdoing. Some of that stuff can rightly be considered evidence. But, there has to be an easier way for someone to get seized assets back, once cleared of wrongdoing.

By the time a hearing is done, it's not unreasonable to think the assets that would be seized could be long gone. Then how are we to collect the awarded seizure/forfeiture?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 8:23:15 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
At this level, they really shouldn't be at the starting point of planning.


Agreed, but, better now than later.

If you want shade from an oak tree, the best time to plant is 20 years ago. The next best time, is now.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/25/2017 9:00:29 PM   
outlier


Posts: 1111
Joined: 10/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: outlier

Here is an article with more details about the practice
from 2013 in The New Yorker.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

You not only do not have to be convicted, you don't have to
even be charged. Furthermore it can all start because: You
were driving too close to the line, or You drove in the left
lane for 1/2 mile without passing. Or your son sold $20 worth
of weed while on your front porch, so we are taking your house.
Too bad you are elderly and have cancer.




Who was president then...


The seizures I mentioned from the article were not federal.
They were states and counties. Of course in order to discuss
that instead of just a having reflexive spasm of hatred, you would
have to do two things beyond your demonstrated capacities.

Read and Think.



_____________________________

Avatar from xkcd.com

"A happy sex life may take years to achieve, but it’s worth it in the long run.
Worth the time, the thought - or rather, the thoughtfulness - and, often,
the waiting." Pete Seeger

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 4:58:30 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline 		it makes one wonder what all the city legislatures around the country are doing in light of this problem.

on another hand, you can see how asset seizure serves to drive more wedges between police and the communities they "serve."

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 5:10:08 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		The forfeiture laws that I am aware of are all state and federal and were the product of the nutsuckers under St. Wrinklemeats reign. Typically cities dont have legislatures, only councils, and cannot under any state constitution I am aware of override state law. State laws cannot override Federal law, so there it is.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:06:42 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		The Rockefeller Drug Law mentality.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:11:49 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
it makes one wonder what all the city legislatures around the country are doing in light of this problem.
on another hand, you can see how asset seizure serves to drive more wedges between police and the communities they "serve."


Sadly, I think city and state legislatures are probably salivating over the "revenue stream."


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:26:55 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

the bigger issue at hand is, is the idea behind the program justifiable and if so, are the problems with it simply a matter of implementation.

and if the problems with the implementation of it cannot get around conflicts of interest, human greed and the desire for power, how does that affect the essence of the idea and what should be/could be done about the obvious pitfalls.

and lastly, how exactly has sessions "expanded the program."


Sessions has states that the Justice Department will issue new directives to increase the federal government's use of civil assets forfeiture. (By rolling back some Obama era restraints on it.)

Not criminal forfeiture - which requires a conviction.

Civil asset forfeiture - otherwise known as stealing from citizens - which requires no charges or convictions.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:30:03 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

it seems a reasonable way to avoid conflicts of interest and unethical behavior would be to limit the occurrence of any forfeitures to after a conviction and to make it less a "seizure" and more of a jury awarded thing where the state has to make the case for it.


Yes. That would be criminal forfeiture. And it would be constitutional.

Despite what SCOTUS has ruled, many of us agree that CAF is unconstitutional.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:31:59 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: outlier


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: outlier

Here is an article with more details about the practice
from 2013 in The New Yorker.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

You not only do not have to be convicted, you don't have to
even be charged. Furthermore it can all start because: You
were driving too close to the line, or You drove in the left
lane for 1/2 mile without passing. Or your son sold $20 worth
of weed while on your front porch, so we are taking your house.
Too bad you are elderly and have cancer.




Who was president then...


The seizures I mentioned from the article were not federal.
They were states and counties. Of course in order to discuss
that instead of just a having reflexive spasm of hatred, you would
have to do two things beyond your demonstrated capacities.

Read and Think.




Yes, except local/state municipalities can "share" their case with the feds so that it falls under federal seizing rules (helpful when your state/local area has made laws against it) and then the local office gets to keep 80% of what was seized.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to outlier)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution - 7/26/2017 6:50:29 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Oy.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: DOJ continues wiping their ass with the Constitution Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.172