Mississippi Bill Would Let Cops Forfeit Cash And Cars - Without The Owner Going To Court

[jamesrage]

Basically Mississippi wants to make it easier to steal your property and cash. In the news and entertainment did it's job properly then civil forfeiture would be a thing of the past.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksi...ithout-the-owner-going-to-court/#6351d9269a87

Mississippi, along with 46 other states, allows law enforcement to use civil forfeiture to take possession and ownership of property, even if they never convict the owner or file criminal charges. Thanks to its powers of confiscation, law enforcement in the Magnolia State has seized over $2.3 million worth of property over the past 18 months, including 54 vehicles, dozens of firearms, and several iPhones.
But a bill introduced last week would revive “administrative” forfeiture in Mississippi, a form of civil forfeiture that has even fewer safeguards for innocent property owners. If enacted, property seized under the state’s Uniform Controlled Substances Law and valued at under $20,000 could be permanently confiscated without Mississippians ever getting their day in court.

 

[Helix]

"civil forfeiture" is theft.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Basically Mississippi wants to make it easier to steal your property and cash. In the news and entertainment did it's job properly then civil forfeiture would be a thing of the past.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksi...ithout-the-owner-going-to-court/#6351d9269a87

Mississippi, along with 46 other states, allows law enforcement to use civil forfeiture to take possession and ownership of property, even if they never convict the owner or file criminal charges. Thanks to its powers of confiscation, law enforcement in the Magnolia State has seized over $2.3 million worth of property over the past 18 months, including 54 vehicles, dozens of firearms, and several iPhones.
But a bill introduced last week would revive “administrative” forfeiture in Mississippi, a form of civil forfeiture that has even fewer safeguards for innocent property owners. If enacted, property seized under the state’s Uniform Controlled Substances Law and valued at under $20,000 could be permanently confiscated without Mississippians ever getting their day in court.

This should be great for those who aren't fans of due process. Like the idiots that want to keep those on the no-fly list from buying guns without understanding that there is no due process for getting on the no-fly list and no way to get off of it.

 

[lwf]

This should be great for those who aren't fans of due process. Like the idiots that want to keep those on the no-fly list from buying guns without understanding that there is no due process for getting on the no-fly list and no way to get off of it.

This it the truth. I attended a talk by an FBI agent who said he put his ex-wife on the no-fly list for a week before taking her off, just to be a dick.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

This it the truth. I attended a talk by an FBI agent who said he put his ex-wife on the no-fly list for a week before taking her off, just to be a dick.

Perhaps that dick should be cut off.

 

[Jetboogieman]

How civil forfeiture is considered legal under the constitution is beyond me.

 

[prometeus]

Basically Mississippi wants to make it easier to steal your property and cash. In the news and entertainment did it's job properly then civil forfeiture would be a thing of the past.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksi...ithout-the-owner-going-to-court/#6351d9269a87

Mississippi, along with 46 other states, allows law enforcement to use civil forfeiture to take possession and ownership of property, even if they never convict the owner or file criminal charges. Thanks to its powers of confiscation, law enforcement in the Magnolia State has seized over $2.3 million worth of property over the past 18 months, including 54 vehicles, dozens of firearms, and several iPhones.
But a bill introduced last week would revive “administrative” forfeiture in Mississippi, a form of civil forfeiture that has even fewer safeguards for innocent property owners. If enacted, property seized under the state’s Uniform Controlled Substances Law and valued at under $20,000 could be permanently confiscated without Mississippians ever getting their day in court.

Must be all those republican values and ideals.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

How civil forfeiture is considered legal under the constitution is beyond me.

Tough on crime and racist dog whistle rhetoric scaring old white people into voting for both sides really. Dems, Repubs they both own this one. It was comments like Hillary calling black dudes Super Predators. And Reagans promise to build more prisons for the "Drug War". They would create these bipartisan tough on crime bills and sneak this in.

The latest offender, is Sessions, he expanded the hell out of asset forfeiture which is allowing states to do things like this. One of the few things I like about Obama was he started rolling it back.

 

[Lursa]

Must be all those republican values and ideals.

Less big govt, less intrusion into people's lives, right? :roll:

 

[jamesrage]

Must be all those republican values and ideals.

Considering its happening in 46 other states this is not a left verse right issue.

 

[Vern]

Considering its happening in 46 other states this is not a left verse right issue.

After almost 14 years and over 32,000 posts, JR has posted something perfectly reasonable.

 

[btthegreat]

This is rarer than Dodo bird feathers. An issue that enrages both the left and right on both prinicipled and practical grounds. We can get this one done and trim the wings of civil forfeiture laws. I am 100% on board.

 

[Obscurity]

Old fashioned fascism. The new state of America.

This is an exceptional overreach.

These laws must be absolutely crushed and ground to dust.

 

[prometeus]

Considering its happening in 46 other states this is not a left verse right issue.

Yet you only cited Mississippi. Why is that?

 

[D_NATURED]

How civil forfeiture is considered legal under the constitution is beyond me.

Dude, it's Mississippi, they think constitution means you need Exlax.

 

[Obscurity]

Dude, it's Mississippi, they think constitution means you need Exlax.

Oddly enough, Mississippi is a signatory for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

One of the few issues on which the rank and file Left and Right are largely in agreement.

 

[holbritter]

Yet you only cited Mississippi. Why is that?

Because that's what's in the news right now?

 

[D_NATURED]

Oddly enough, Mississippi is a signatory for the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Fools. They won't like the result.

 

[prometeus]

Because that's what's in the news right now?

If that was the case it would have been more accurate to state that Mississippi ALSO is dong it.

 

[jmotivator]

Fools. They won't like the result.

That compact would only last as long as the outcome in every state matched the popular vote. The second a state ends up dedicating all of its electoral votes to a candidate that didn't win that state it's over.

 

[holbritter]

If that was the case it would have been more accurate to state that Mississippi ALSO is dong it.

What difference does it make? Unless you just want to pick a fight.

 

[jmotivator]

One of the few issues on which the rank and file Left and Right are largely in agreement.

Indeed.

"this system—where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use—has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses." For one thing, "because the law enforcement entity responsible for seizing the property often keeps it, these entities have strong incentives to pursue forfeiture." For another, this sort of police abuse disproportionately harms disadvantaged groups. "These forfeiture operations frequently target the poor and other groups least able to defend their interests in forfeiture proceedings," he observed. "Perversely, these same groups are often the most burdened by forfeiture. They are more likely to use cash than alternative forms of payment, like credit cards, which may be less susceptible to forfeiture. And they are more likely to suffer in their daily lives while they litigate for the return of a critical item of property, such as a car or a home." - Justice Clarence Thomas

 

[Stealers Wheel]

As bad as civil forfeiture laws are (and they are bad), the worst part is that these laws are completely arbitrary in enforcement.

Here is an example:

Have you ever heard of law enforcement seizing a major airline's aircraft? Of course not, because it has never happened and never will happen.

Yet, I know of at least one instance where a guy ran a small charter service with a single plane. He would fly just about anywhere for a fee. He had been in business for several years when he booked a charter to and from Mexico. His customer returned to the U.S. carrying a substantial quantity of illicit drugs in his baggage.

You guessed it. The charter owner lost his plane to civil forfeiture since it was used in the crime and no charges were ever levied against him. Since the plane was his sole source of income, he had no means to fund a legal challenge to the forfeiture.

Almost daily, drugs are seized at major airports as mules try to discreetly claim their luggage, luggage that was carried on major airlines into the country. But because major airlines have both the financial and legal resources to resist forfeitures, law enforcement does not exert their power against powerful targets. It would be too costly. So, they limit their efforts against people who do not have resources to object.

 

[prometeus]

What difference does it make? Unless you just want to pick a fight.

It make a difference if you take into account the pretense that red states are more inclined to protect the rights of people and follow the Constitution.