DEA Steals $16,000 In Cash From Young Black Man, Because He Must Be A Drug Dealer

Thugs.

That's what they are, government thugs.

They're no better than Guido or Luigi.

And now the Supreme Morons have institutionalized racketeering and extortion into the law.

The law is a joke. It's no wonder no one respects it anymore.

 

I don't disagree with you at all. We need to elect representatives that can turn this around. The problem is - they all want to appear to be "tough on crime," and they go along to get along.

 

Me too. I also get called a liberal, rather frequently.

Politicians are nothing without people to enforce the things they write on paper. There's plenty of blame to go around!

 

All law is subordinate to the Constitution. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. If a Federal, local, or State statute contradicts the Constitution, then the Constitution prevails. The Constitution says no person shall be deprived of their property without due process of law. The people and the juries of this country are only obligated to obey laws which are Constitutional.

It is the obligation of the people and the juries of the courts to rule that laws like this are as unconstitutional as prohibition was. By the way, that is why prohibition was overturned, the people refused to convict people of laws against prohibition despite a questionable Constitutional Amendment.

 

Yes, and yes.

The problem is that the Supreme Court of the United States has already upheld civil asset forfeiture and the Supremes have "judicial review."

At this point - the Supremes have determined (rightly or wrongly) that civil forfeiture does not violate constitutional rights.

Here is the issue - a case must be appealed through the court system all the way to the SCOTUS in order for us to get a changed ruling.

The reason they're upholding it is because it is a tool designed not to allow profit from criminal activities. That, in itself, does not violate the Constitution.

When an innocent person's assets are seized, however, his rights have been violated. He has redress, though, so he can pursue his case in the court system. That's the legal loophole. Because, just because he "can" pursue it - doesn't mean he has the money to pursue it. So - it's a total ripoff. Justice here in the United States is for those who can afford to pay for the best legal representation.

If grassroots groups could form and stop this at the state level, it would be good. Not very many folks know about it, though, and it's hard to find the support necessary to get a movement like that going.

 

Once again, the CRACK PIPE POST proves that left wing sources ALWAYS (*)(*)(*)(*) with the truth.

Here's the deal, IDIOTS. People spend money on music videos all the time. They've been known to spend ten times as much as this bozo here. But they don't do it with cash. In fact, in America it is actually ILLEGAL to carry more than $10,000 cash.

He was breaking the law by having that much in cash. Had he had it in a bank account with a debit card, it still would be in his possession. Why didn't he have it in a bank account?

Could it be that maybe he was lying about all this and was indeed looking to score a lot of dope? Could it be that he had just made a major sale of dope?

There is a price to pay for being stupid. Cash forfeiture laws have been on the books for over 30 years. EARTH TO MCFLY!!!! The legislators who passed those laws did not shoot their way into power. The legislators who will NOT overturn those laws obviously did not shoot their way into power.

You don't know the meaning of the word "democracy." That's like the STUPIDEST statement ever.
Guilty-until-proven-innocent is from the FIFTH AMENDMENT, a provision ratified by the same Founding Fathers who looked DOWN on the word "democracy." America has NEVER been a democracy. That's just ignorant beyond comprehension.

This idiot mismanaged his money. Either that or he WAS a dope dealer trying to lie his way out of losing that money.

That's not even a SMART LIE. Stories like this seizure of cash have been prevalent for over 30 years.

 

Wrong. Before you call others "idiots," do a bit of research to ensure that you're not making yourself look like one as well.
http://www.snopes.com/business/money/10000.asp

See above.

Could be - but "could be" is not enough to convict. More evidence is needed.

A lot longer than that, actually, and not restricted to cash, but that's not the point.

I think you meant "innocent-until-proven-guilty," not "guilty-until-proven-innocent," but you've made so many mistakes in your post that I can't be sure. By the way, the presumption of innocence comes from the 5th, 6th and 14th amendments. Before that - it's traceable all the way back to ancient Roman law.

Dealing dope is a crime - mismanaging of money is not. See my first response. Again. Sigh.

 

<Mod Edit: Rule 2> the $10,000+ alleged MYTH is for real. It doesn't have to appear on any state statutes in order to be valid law, (just as Roe V. Wade is not even CLOSE to being in the Constitution) If the $10,000 seizure case was argued before a judge (and I'm sure it was, many times) all that judge had to do was pound his gavel, rule for the prosecution and that's a LAW. Snopes never went to law school or a college to get a paralegal degree.

From what I gather, he wasn't convicted of anything. He merely had his cash seized.
<Mod Edit: Rule 2>

That's the only point this story is trying to make.

You caught ONE mistake. Guilty until proven innocent comes from the CIVIL law code. Innocent until proven guilty comes from English Common Law.
<Mod Edit: Rule 2> the term CIVIL is not to be confused with a civil suit versus a criminal prosecution. CIVIL is a code originating in France. In America, Louisiana is the only state that recognizes CIVIL law, although I don't know where they stand on the guilty until proven innocent thing.

<Mod Edit: Rule 3> He was MISMANAGING money. That money wasn't STOLEN from him. He was STUPID. And stupid can cost you a lot of money these days.

 

Please show the law that makes it illegal to carry more than $10,000 cash.

The man was never charged with a crime.

As a rightwinger, this kind of thing disturbs me. They are violating the 4th, 5th and 14th amendments. As I've said before in this thread, if the man was charged with and convicted for a crime, I'd be all for confiscation. However, without that, this is just the legal theft by an over-reaching government.

What do you think about this guy? He had his money confiscated for continuously depositing cash of less than $10,000. He owned a convenience store.
http://reason.com/blog/2015/05/01/irs-steals-107000-from-convenience-store
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/15/attorneys-feds-will-give-nc-man-his-seized-107gs-back/

 

Is it joke? DEA agents, who should arrest thugs, only with evidence, steals money from black only because he's black?
Lol, this is really absurd.
The DEA Throws Orgies With Drug Cartels in Colombia, DEA Steals $16,000 In Cash From Young Black Man, Because He Must Be A Drug Dealer
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THEM?!

 

Rant and rave all you like - you're wrong and you're making a fool of yourself.

Duh - this is CIVIL forfeiture. Do you ever post on topics you have a clue about?

Wow. Just wow. I've yet to see you get a single thing right.

"Admit I'm wrong?" Excuse me? I got nothing wrong. I never do. I'm not even going to explain the depth of you incorrectness. I have no desire to waste my time teaching children.

 

lol

Thats freakn hilarious !!!!

I hate to break it to you, but the other side of socialism means the masses get to control your actions.

 

Assuming that source is even close to correct, did it ever occur to you that maybe blacks and hispanics COMMIT more of those crimes and that there might be a good reason to search them more? That's certainly the rationale BLACK COPS use when profiling a perp.

 

Here's a link to a petition at Whitehouse.gov to do something about civil forfeiture abuse. This is not a partisan issue . You can see the petition (and sign if you choose to) here;

http://wh.gov/iKk2D

 

Skin color is not sufficient probable cause for search and seizure.

 

You must not be old enough then to remember Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign, the anti-drug hysteria that accompanied it, and the de facto nullification of the 4th Amendment by Mrs. Reagan's husband's signing of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. I'm not sure what you think is so 'freakn hilarious,' but these are facts.

I'm not sure I understand what that has to do with the topic at hand? Could you explain the point you are trying to make and its relevance to this discussion?

 

But that's the problem. We allowed our government (mostly Ronald Reagan and the CCCA of 1984) to essentially nullify due process and the 4th Amendment. And the USSC has, each time it has heard a challenge, affirmed the legislation. It is time for Americans to wake the (*)(*)(*)(*) up, but we are too busy worrying about which Kardashian is (*)(*)(*)(*)ing Paris Hilton and if Snooky can fit in a bikini. We get the government we deserve.

- - - Updated - - -

But the nullification of due process does.

 

Uh, got a citation for that?

 

He's got a paralegal degree, so he doesn't need a citation...





lol

 

The government has been asset stealing for decades and will until someone in the government is jailed for the theft...which will never happen as government will never police itself...not in today's America. We are in many ways worse than a banana republic for there one can at least get what you pay your bribes for.

- - - Updated - - -

That does not matter, once stolen the feds are very reluctant to return their ill gotten gains...

- - - Updated - - -

Because the left could care less if it was a 'Young white man'...

 

It is common for government at all levels to steal from folk...it is what they do

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=2

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

 

It is only wrong if someone goes to jail for doing it and the government will never let that happen

 

You do not even have to be charged...the government considers it found money sort of like treasure.

 

Asking the White House to stop organized government crime is about as effective as asking the moon to please be a little bit brighter, a useless endeavor.