Corrupt Cops, Corruption, Pig, Pigs

Civil Forfeiture is INSANE. They Can Just Take Your Stuff, Even Without a Crime Having Taken Place… Except in New Mexico Since 2015. | New Study Finds Forfeiture Doesn’t Fight Crime, Is Used to Raise Revenue | POLICING FOR PROFIT

So only one state has adequate protections in place for this predatory and immoral form of “policing”. But even the Feds can do this if they feel like it. So it’s a precarious and very unfair situation for the pesky citizen.

The L.A. District Attorney had a freaking seminar on what kinds of products to target(steal) from innocent civilians who were guilty of no crime when they were casing merchandise during an investigation[usually an illegal one]. These incentives were even built into the city budget! I’m sure implemented with quotas and highly questionable police reports to go along with these questionable confiscations of property. This practice is rampant. Protecting the average citizen from abuses like these were basic and instrumental to the Magna Carta and the first English Bill of Rights was designed to shield the public from institutionalized crimes like these.

So would anymore states like to step up and look into doing something about this on your own turf? This is theft. Plain and simple. I’m going to send my state Legislators a letter about this matter. They’ve been surprisingly good about at least acting like they are reading my emails whenever I’ve emailed them in the past.

It’s insane that the police decided they weren’t going to enforce these new laws and they had to get rung up in court like the mob syndicate of gay-porn filming rats they are.

Civil Forfeiture doesn’t encourage crime in any way. The statistical analysis proves this. The cops are just butt hurt that they cannot steal from people as easily as they used to. “New Study Finds Forfeiture Doesn’t Fight Crime, Is Used to Raise Revenue“(VIDEO BELOW)

IJ’s Justin Wilson discusses “Does Forfeiture Work? Evidence from the States” with author Dr. Brian Kelly of Seattle University. The study is the first to look at whether state forfeiture actually fights crime or is instead used to “police for profit.” Looking at data from five states that use forfeiture extensively—Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Michigan and Minnesota—it finds forfeiture doesn’t work to fight crime but is used to raise revenue. These results are particularly salient during the COVID-19 pandemic, when local governments are facing budget shortfalls. They also add to mounting evidence that forfeiture fails to serve the public good, all while violating Americans’ property and due process rights, showing the pressing need for forfeiture reform.
In Episode 30 of Deep Dive, we talked about how fines for harmless property code violations could snowball into six-figure debt. All too often, municipalities set up these “taxation by citation” schemes to bolster city budgets—not protect public health and safety. Schemes like this are rife with due process problems, and in today’s episode, we discuss the way Kafka-esqe code enforcement systems in many cities make it very easy to incur ever increasing amounts of fines and fees—while erecting barriers that make it very difficult to challenge them. We’ll also talk about what the Constitution means when it guarantees due process and IJ’s legal strategy for tackling abusive fines and fees regimes. Host: Melanie Hildreth Guests: IJ attorneys Diana Simpson and Josh House More podcasts:… Hear about the cases, issues, and tactics advancing IJ’s fight for freedom—directly from the people on the front lines. Deep Dive with the Institute for Justice explores the legal theories, strategies, and methods IJ uses to bring about real world change, expanding individual liberty and ending abuses of government power. Each episode gives listeners an in-depth, inside look at how—and why—we do what we do.

This term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Caniglia v. Strom, a case about the “community caretaking” exception to the general principle that police need a warrant before entering a home. In today’s episode, we talk about what the government and the property owner argued in that case and what the Court ruled. We also dig into the history of the community caretaking doctrine and the biggest current threats to Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure.
%d bloggers like this: