(07-20-2017 08:32 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 08:27 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Say what you will about Obama, but he ended that practice federally.

Nope.

Can't even give him credit when it's due, huh?

(07-20-2017 09:15 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 08:32 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 08:27 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Say what you will about Obama, but he ended that practice federally.

Nope.

Can't even give him credit when it's due, huh?

Not due. He didn't end the practice. Holder did curtail the ability of states to proceed under more permissive federal law, which was probably the best thing he did as AG, but neither he nor Obama ended it.

like he said: can't give credit where credit is due.

Speaking of Sessions.... it sounds like he's about to get canned...

(07-20-2017 09:11 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 08:48 AM)JTiger Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 08:27 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 06:36 AM)JTiger Wrote:  

(07-18-2017 10:03 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  I've been against Civil Forfeiture since I learned about the practice back in 2014. Prior to that, I was wasn't aware / was ignorant to the issue.

Criminals shouldn't be allowed to keep the proceeds of their crime, but this practice is being severely abused. In many cases, people can lose their property without being charged or convicted of a crime. For example, if my son used my car without my permission or my consent to make a drug deal, my car can be seized as civil forfeiture. It puts the burden of proof on the accused, rather than the government... I don't like that.

It really just seems like a way local police forces can add a bit of a cash infusion into their budgets, or to get them some fancy new piece of equipment.

It's usually pretty blatant for the cops around here to seize your car. The driver or passenger needs to be carrying drugs or a huge amount of money like thousands of dollars.

Simple answer is get better friends or don't let your lowlife friends or family members driver your car. This happens all the time where someone "borrowed" a friends car and he did a drug deal and the owner of the car has to get it back. Pick your friends better. Srs

This is the mindset that certain conservative seem to have, despite it going against arguably the single most important and consistently championed conservative cause; right to property.

No, the DoJ shouldn't get to take my property because someone else broke the law, or because they suspect me of breaking the law. Charge me with a crime or keep your hands off my stuff. Say what you will about Obama, but he ended that practice federally.

It's not just cars that are seized. If you have a large sum of money on your person then the cops can seize the cash because they suspect you are a drug dealer.

"I just sold a car" is the classic line they hear everyday from drug dealers but they have a drug arrest record. Maybe on the side they sell cars ; )

Basic life lesson in picking your friends and don't hang out with friends that get you arrested or your property confiscated. Leave those losers behind.

I understand how it's used, it just doesn't hold up from a civil rights perspective. Your defense of it is especially concerning, by that same logic you can be arrested just for being near that person breaking the law.

Aiding and abetting

If you are in the car while your loser, criminal friend robs a bank you are an accessory

Can this law get abused be law enforcement? absolutely. Is it abused on a more often than not? No

This is certainly an issue that can be a slippery slope but that is why we have representation. I would suggest those that feel strongly about this to contact your state representative.

(07-20-2017 09:07 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  And it's not just the federal govt that's running the racket:

Guy wants to build his dream home.. and may not be able to

Quote:Of the $214,000 inheritance, he spent $125,000 for the property and put the rest into improvements for a power connection, water well, septic drawings, septic engineering and road engineering.

He also bought an old front end loader, a dump truck, used car, shipping container and a chicken coop with four hens. All are parked on his property


Jeanie Rossillon, Jefferson County’s director of development and transportation, said that under existing code, the RV is considered an accessory and cannot be parked on the property without a house. Ditto for the shipping container.

Smith says he will build one, but needs more time. In the meantime, he wants to live in his RV and leave it parked on his property.

“I own this property,” he told Denver7, with emotion welling up in his voice. “I paid for it in cash. It’s all mine. I should be able to live on it for a certain amount of time, while I’m surveying, engineering or planning.”

Smith says he has very little money left to move everything.

He worries that he’ll end up being homeless again and that he’ll have to park his RV at Walmart.

This is not the same thing.

Zoning is zoning. And its not exactly secret. I can only park my RV in my driveway for 24 hour periods.

I don't mind the zoning ordinance because I do not want my neighborhood to look like a U Store U Lock lot for old cars, boats, trailers, and other junk.

(07-20-2017 09:43 AM)john01992 Wrote:  like he said: can't give credit where credit is due.

Ask for credit where it's due. Owl gave that. Credit shouldn't be falsely handed out. Like Nobel Peace prizes.

So Trump hates Sessions now. Heart of Dixie, which side are you on now?

(07-20-2017 09:43 AM)john01992 Wrote:  like he said: can't give credit where credit is due.

I gave the credit due, and explained why it wasn't what was claimed.

Are you too stupid to understand English words, or too partisan to take proper notice?

Look, I very strongly oppose what Sessions did here. But that doesn't mean I agree with Holder/Obama. And I don't.

(07-20-2017 07:12 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 09:43 AM)john01992 Wrote:  like he said: can't give credit where credit is due.

Ask for credit where it's due. Owl gave that. Credit shouldn't be falsely handed out. Like Nobel Peace prizes.

I see what you did there.

(07-21-2017 08:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-20-2017 09:43 AM)john01992 Wrote:  like he said: can't give credit where credit is due.

I gave the credit due, and explained why it wasn't what was claimed.

Are you too stupid to understand English words, or too partisan to take proper notice?

Look, I very strongly oppose what Sessions did here. But that doesn't mean I agree with Holder/Obama. And I don't.

I got to hand it to you Johnny. This is the first time I've seen Owl throw a fit. He must be really tired of your stupidity. He's the most calm, serene poster here but you riled a sleeping dog.

I'm on your side Owl, Johnny is so s****d he could exasperate the Pope.

Lol Owl does this all the time. You just don't acknowledge it because he leans conservative on practically every issue. The fact remains he can't give credit when credit is due.

(07-21-2017 04:12 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Lol Owl does this all the time. You just don't acknowledge it because he leans conservative on practically every issue. The fact remains he can't give credit when credit is due.

OK, what did he do that I didn't give credit for?