Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Action Forum' started by The Other David, Sep 13, 2017.
Why do you hate law enforcement and the rule of law?
Why do you have to use logical fallacies and projection to attempt to have a defensible position?
All I see anyone saying is that there's little point in throwing out the entire intent over abuses. Regulate/mitigate the abuses.....in ALL government property/taxation overreach....not just a few pet areas. All of it. Problem is, we don't punish government abusers of policy, law, or rights. See Hillary Clinton and the State Dept, Lois Lerner, IRS, etc.
Liberals hate the constitution, period. They're leftists masquerading as liberals. Leftists can't get what they really want, with our constitution in place.
Yep, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I'm more worried about self-driving tractor trailer trucks.
Is this a serious post?
I'll take it that you are in the "no, I don't want to have a rational discussion of the plusses and minuses of civil forfeiture laws".
So who do more closely identify with? Cheech? or Chong?
CAF laws allow the government to seize and keep the property of individuals who have never been convicted or even charged with a crime.
You may not be familiar with this paragraph, but I will let you determine its source.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, ***nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law***; ***nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation***.
Now, please tell us all about "...the plusses... of civil forfeiture laws".
Just for the sake of argument, people are deprived of liberty every day, without being convicted, if the authority believes them guilty. Taking their property seems an extension of that if it is suspected the asset is a product of the criminal activity.
I still contend self-driving semi trucks are a greater danger to society.
I agree, as evidenced (amongst other things) by entitlement spending.
Not sure why you feel the need to deflect but... OK?
Feel free to advocate why you think this guy's truck and $4K should be forfeit.