View Full Version : Highway Patrol can drain your prepaid cards if they think you're a criminal
If a trooper suspects a person may have money tied to some type of crime, the highway patrol can scan and seize money from prepaid cards. Highway Patrol stresses troopers do not do this during all traffic stops, only situations where they believe there is probable cause.
...
"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past," Vincent said about any money seized.
...
Troopers insist this isn't just about seizing cash.
...
A copy of the contract with the state shows the state is paying 7.7 percent of all the cash forfeited through the courts to the highway patrol.
Guess the state? Looking at the source is cheating :p
http://www.news9.com/story/32168555/ohp-uses-new-device-to-seize-money-used-during-the-commission-of-a-crime
Eurodriver
06-09-16, 19:15
Keep the anti LE comments in check.
SWATcop556
"Guilty until proven innocent" makes me sick.
ETA: Can't blame this on Obama either given that its in OK.
But you CAN blame Obama for the fact that you can't blame Obama because it was in Oklahoma, since he lost every single district there.
There's a reason I think most Troopers are jokes. They scratch tickets and work wrecks. Once in a while they get some dope.
Possession is 9/10s of the law unless it is seizable.
Do the job honestly or don't freaking do it.
That's why I love the Captain America movies. Nick Fury or Iron Man come up with some slick rick way to "get the bad guys" and Captain America says something like "Gee...we just took em on head to head with guts and balls".
Policework isn't what it used to be.
Outlander Systems
06-09-16, 19:39
What The Actual ****, over?
Is this CONUS news?
This sounds like some Commie, eastern-bloc bullshit.
Not the Onion?
Guess the state? Looking at the source is cheating :p
http://www.news9.com/story/32168555/ohp-uses-new-device-to-seize-money-used-during-the-commission-of-a-crime
They're just hell bent on continuing to erode the trust between police and the public. Further evidence that you should always refuse to consent to a search and refuse to answer any questions beyond providing basic biographical information. License, insurance, registration, give me my citation, may I go? Sad. :(
I already know which state it is, because I live there. Most of the state legislature is in bed with them on this one.
ASSET FORFEITURE IS A CANCER THAT HAS SERIOUSLY ERODED THE ETHICAL AND NOBLE PROFESSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
FlyingHunter
06-09-16, 20:01
All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
Benito Mussolini
Outlander Systems
06-09-16, 20:03
Winner winner. Chicken dinner.
That's what we've come to, brother.
All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
Benito Mussolini
ASSET FORFEITURE IS A CANCER THAT HAS SERIOUSLY ERODED THE ETHICAL AND NOBLE PROFESSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
Brother you are point of aim, point of impact on that.
Some people signed up to get stuff done, not become defacto tax collectors
ETA I have personally known executive law enforcement officers who care more about revenue than actual policing. It should go without saying I am not friends with these people.
Outlander Systems
06-09-16, 20:18
It's the nature of all beasts, homie.
Good people are lorded over by political hacks and opportunists.
Doesn't matter whether they're cops, soldiers, or accountants.
At some point, up that golden ladder, people sell out, and become absolutely rotten creatures.
Brother you are point of aim, point of impact on that.
Some people signed up to get stuff done, not become defacto tax collectors
ETA I have personally known executive law enforcement officers who care more about revenue than actual policing. It should go without saying I am not friends with these people.
SWATcop556
06-09-16, 20:29
Agree or disagree with the policy all you want but the anti LE comments won't extend anyone's stay here on the site.
Man, as I sit here with a badge on my duty belt this disheartens me to the extreme... just wtf...
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Do I agree with this....... absolutely not. Can it lead to possible abuse...... absolutely.
Not to play devils advocate here, but 99 percent of the time this will happen to someone with drugs or selling drugs. We shun the BLM group for leaving out the fact that those people did something to put themselves in the position to make the officer use deadly force. Let's not do the opposite here.
Police have been seizing illegal drug money for years everywhere, don't see how this is any different. Do your duty boys and obey the law, while praying you don't run into a bad cop on a bad day.
Do I agree with this....... absolutely not. Can it lead to possible abuse...... absolutely.
Not to play devils advocate here, but 99 percent of the time this will happen to someone with drugs or selling drugs. We shun the BLM group for leaving out the fact that those people did something to put themselves in the position to make the officer use deadly force. Let's not do the opposite here.
Police have been seizing illegal drug money for years everywhere, don't see how this is any different. Do your duty boys and obey the law, while praying you don't run into a bad cop on a bad day.
The benefits of seizing illicit drug profits, do not outweigh the constitutional violations and bad press for law enforcement that ultimately result from these "asset forfeiture" policies. It is literally legalized highway robbery. I have zero qualms about true asset forfeiture upon conviction that's backed by asset seizure upon issuance of a warrant, but this is bad juju. :(
The benefits of seizing illicit drug profits, do not outweigh the constitutional violations and bad press for law enforcement that ultimately result from these "asset forfeiture" policies. It is literally legalized highway robbery. I have zero qualms about true asset forfeiture upon conviction that's backed by asset seizure upon issuance of a warrant, but this is bad juju. :(
I get what you're saying, and completely agree with you that it's wrong to seize property before conviction. But from my understanding they will have to prove you got the funds by illegal means. If you're dismissed of said crime your monies will have to be returned.
It's a step in the wrong direction for innocent until proven guilty, but I can't say it's worth me fearing my paycheck will get confiscated. That is until I start selling drugs, robbing banks, or printing money.
I will stress again I don't agree with the policy, but would like to believe it won't happen to me due to my life choices. Much like I don't have fear of being shot by police.
Do I agree with this....... absolutely not. Can it lead to possible abuse...... absolutely.
Possible? ??
It has lead to massive abuse.
Everyone involved needs to be publicly hanged.
I don't care if the money is illegal, without a conviction they should not be taking anything. Why do I need to prove where my money came from.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I get what you're saying, and completely agree with you that it's wrong to seize property before conviction. But from my understanding they will have to prove you got the funds by illegal means. If you're dismissed of said crime your monies will have to be returned.
It's a step in the wrong direction for innocent until proven guilty, but I can't say it's worth me fearing my paycheck will get confiscated. That is until I start selling drugs, robbing banks, or printing money.
I will stress again I don't agree with the policy, but would like to believe it won't happen to me due to my life choices. Much like I don't have fear of being shot by police.
That s incorrect. They don't even have to charge you with a crime to keep the money. You have to SUE them to get your money back. :(
Brother you are point of aim, point of impact on that.
Some people signed up to get stuff done, not become defacto tax collectors
ETA I have personally known executive law enforcement officers who care more about revenue than actual policing. It should go without saying I am not friends with these people.
Oh Wingman, our state pretty much goes from one budget crisis to another. Several years ago when the highway patrol was put on mileage restrictions, several officers told me the interdiction guys had no such restrictions.
That whole 'be a drug war hero, he got stars in his eyes, he's a drug war hero' really leads to some shitty officer safety practices two. If you look at several 'classic' patrol videos from a decade or so ago you'll you'll see the Officer Michelle Jeter beat down, Constable Darrel Lunsford and Tropper Mark Coates all get killed making one man band interdiction stops. About the time that Lunsford was killed, Trooper Andy Garcia nearly met the same fate except he was a quick and wiry guy. Search a car for drugs, by yourself, with a group of occupants watching, let me know how that goes.
What really tells you what it is all about is the fact that at least two guys Mark Coates had ate supper with, drove past him on the stop he was killed on and didn't stop to back him up. 'Oh, shit, Mark's got one, I better get to looking or he'll get more than me.' It's a fvcking game,
I think I'll just sit here for a moment and practice my autogenic relaxation techniques, this subject always works me up.
That s incorrect. They don't even have to charge you with a crime to keep the money. You have to SUE them to get your money back. :(
I didn't know that, and I can't defend it. I would like to believe you would have to do something to make an officer believe you got it by illegal means. But if proven innocent you absolutely should not have to sue to get your money back. I guess I somehow still try to have faith in people to do the right thing.
This seems to run contrary to the Due Process Clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments - particularly the part where the citizen carries the burden of proof for recovery of their property.
They are not supposed to auction or sell off your property until conviction, but many often do anyway. If they do and charges get dismissed or the person is found not guilty or aquitted, they are supposed to give you "fair" market value for said items, which is usually far less. Often people have to sue under § 1983 to get their stuff back.
This is old (no less sad) news. They are doing the same thing that is done in every state in the union...only with a new tool. Hardly an Oklahoma only problem.
It is wrong.
As 26INF mentioned, this is part of drug interdiction operations. It is the electronic equivalent of a Trooper stopping a Texas tag and finding $10k cash in the vehicle. They aren't swiping cards on random traffic stops as a shakedown.
I still think absent discovery of any trafficking evidence other than the cash itself, seizure is total horse shit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Moose-Knuckle
06-10-16, 04:23
At least they don't have a doctor perform an endoscopic examination of the large bowel and the distal part of the small bowel like the NM troopers do, sheesh . . .
KalashniKEV
06-10-16, 09:45
Keep the anti LE comments in check.
SWATcop556
I'm disappointed that I missed this, I'm sure it was DELISH.
ASSET FORFEITURE IS A CANCER THAT HAS SERIOUSLY ERODED THE ETHICAL AND NOBLE PROFESSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
+1
It basically leads normal, law abiding suburban-folk to the same conclusion that normal, law abiding city-folk have come to:
1) The police are not your friends.
2) Police involvement will make your life worse.
3) Do nothing that will create an "in" for Law Enforcement.
They are not supposed to auction or sell off your property until conviction, but many often do anyway.
LOL... probably there's still some dude out there trying to get an iPhone 3S back after the po-po has enjoyed his girlfriends pics and sold it back in 2010...
Civil Asset Forfeiture is thievery, plain and simple. At least when they feel up your girl they have some ostensible reason to support them in court.
This is just like, "we stole your stuff, because we needed stuff to sell, so we can get money."
It makes perfect sense to Nautika Harris and it makes perfect sense to the departments who engage in it.
I'm disappointed that I missed this, I'm sure it was DELISH.
+1
It basically leads normal, law abiding suburban-folk to the same conclusion that normal, law abiding city-folk have come to:
1) The police are not your friends.
2) Police involvement will make your life worse.
3) Do nothing that will create an "in" for Law Enforcement.
LOL... probably there's still some dude out there trying to get an iPhone 3S back after the po-po has enjoyed his girlfriends pics and sold it back in 2010...
Civil Asset Forfeiture is thievery, plain and simple. At least when they feel up your girl they have some ostensible reason to support them in court.
This is just like, "we stole your stuff, because we needed stuff to sell, so we can get money."
It makes perfect sense to Nautika Harris and it makes perfect sense to the departments who engage in it.
Holy crap, KEV and I agree on something.....
At least they don't have a doctor perform an endoscopic examination of the large bowel and the distal part of the small bowel like the NM troopers do, sheesh . . .
In all fairness to the troopers, that suspect was clenching his buttocks...;)
eightmillimeter
06-10-16, 10:27
There's a reason I think most Troopers are jokes. They scratch tickets and work wrecks. Once in a while they get some dope.
Possession is 9/10s of the law unless it is seizable.
Do the job honestly or don't freaking do it.
That's why I love the Captain America movies. Nick Fury or Iron Man come up with some slick rick way to "get the bad guys" and Captain America says something like "Gee...we just took em on head to head with guts and balls".
Policework isn't what it used to be.
So when they stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country with a stack of prepaid VISA debit cards with 100k on them they shouldn't look into that?
So when they stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country with a stack of prepaid VISA debit cards with 100k on them they shouldn't look into that?
No, but they should probably focus on the human trafficking, not how many new toys they can buy with the plastic currency. :(
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 10:50
Exactly. Policies like the one posted in the OP are bad for LE/Public relations.
It further erodes public trust in LE.
It legitimizes, and encourages corruption.
But, hell, it makes the "big dogs" look good on paper, so there's that.
90% of the problems in this country are based on poor leadership. We have, on a whole, a massive leadership deficit.
No, but they should probably focus on the human trafficking, not how many new toys they can buy with the plastic currency. :(
KalashniKEV
06-10-16, 10:56
So when they stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country with a stack of prepaid VISA debit cards with 100k on them they shouldn't look into that?
OMGosh... your hypothetical raises a chilling question:
If they did "stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country" would they also then be able to seize the girls and use them as they see fit???
The cops are supposed to be better than the criminals. There are a lot of places where they are not. That number of places is expanding.
Did anyone read the article, or are they playing the "jump...to conclusions game"?
It is for PREPAID CARDS. If that is your "bank account" then I guess the title isn't completely misleading. Also "think" and probable cause are two entirely different things. But the topic title worked, it drew in the right crowd.
I know the "infowarrior" Alex Jones blowhards wont believe this but.......These would probably be used to confiscate money on prepaid cards involved in an interdiction stop. You see dope runners are looking for ways around cash forfeitures, so the next logical step would be to stop carrying cash. I don't know the exact policy on when they can be used, since the piece of garbage sensational journalism piece doesn't include actual facts.
But lets get back to the tinfoil "they're coming to steal all our money" bullshit....
OMGosh... your hypothetical raises a chilling question:
If they did "stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country" would they also then be able to seize the girls and use them as they see fit???
The cops are supposed to be better than the criminals. There are a lot of places where they are not. That number of places is expanding.
That post is a perfect example of what this board is turning into.
KalashniKEV
06-10-16, 11:00
But lets get back to the tinfoil "they're coming to steal all our money" bullshit....
It's a simple issue of "not yours."
It isn't.
It's a simple issue of "not yours."
It isn't.
Its a simple issue of "you have no idea what you're taking about". Whats the policy of the use of this tech? Can you even articulate what "probable cause" is? Have you done any research beyond reading the tiny exert provided in the OP?
No you don't, haven't, and wont. Yep, its that simple.
KalashniKEV
06-10-16, 11:10
Can you even articulate what "probable cause" is?
One would hope that the officer can articulate "probable cause" before stealing the money.
I say "stealing" because unless he's Judge Dredd, there's no way that this is not a violation of due process.
Plus, you know whoever is bringing is the most cash is going to wear the diamond tiara around that-particular-agency. It creates a perverse incentive for LEOs to violate their oaths- and that's enough of a reason why Civil Asset Forfeiture should not exist.
One would hope that the officer can articulate "probable cause" before stealing the money
Interesting. So I gather my statement was correct.
ASSET FORFEITURE IS A CANCER THAT HAS SERIOUSLY ERODED THE ETHICAL AND NOBLE PROFESSION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.
werd up
Policework isn't what it used to be.
Please elaborate....this should be entertaining.
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 11:19
So, just to clarify, you find it acceptable to steal?
Dress it up however you want, bro. Civil Asset Forfeiture is ****ing theft.
You see dope runners are looking for ways around cash forfeitures, so the next logical step would be to stop carrying cash.
90% of the problems in this country are based on poor leadership. We have, on a whole, a massive leadership deficit.
I've said before the problem is one that's top down. Any issues with law enforcement are generally a symptom of the piss poor laws they're given to enforce, for which they're doing the best they can with the tools available.
And I wonder how I would be treated. At various times I've bought piles of gift and prepaid cards to game the credit card points system and get free vacations and such. At one point I think I was rolling around with $5-$6k in various gift cards in the truck.....
So, just to clarify, you find it acceptable to steal?
Dress it up however you want, bro. Civil Asset Forfeiture is ****ing theft.
So, just to clarify, can you find any post where I've mentioned I agree with asset forfeiture, bro? I'll save you some time, bro. You cant.
With that said, I like to point out that none of the mental midgets that are acting like complete buffoons in this thread have any idea what the Agencies policy requires to use this software. If someone is stopped with 500lbs of dope and has 6 dozen prepaid cards on them, I would hope they would be confiscated and logged into evidence. Same goes to the afore mentioned human trafficking scenario which was turned into a joke. Do I agree with pulling the money off the cards? No. But seizing them is a no brainer. Do I honestly give a shit about some coyote losing all his money...not really.
But hey, bro, I guess this gives you a reason not to go to the shit stain known as Oklahoma (or did you even know where this tyrannical oppression was taking place?)
(P.S. I aint your bro)
So, just to clarify, can you find any post where I've mentioned I agree with asset forfeiture, bro? I'll save you some time, bro. You cant.
With that said, I like to point out that none of the mental midgets that are acting like complete buffoons in this thread have any idea what the Agencies policy requires to use this software. If someone is stopped with 500lbs of dope and has 6 dozen prepaid cards on them, I would hope they would be confiscated and logged into evidence. Same goes to the afore mentioned human trafficking scenario which was turned into a joke. Do I agree with pulling the money off the cards? No. But seizing them is a no brainer. Do I honestly give a shit about some coyote losing all his money...not really.
But hey, bro, I guess this gives you a reason not to go to the shit stain known as Oklahoma (or did you even know where this tyrannical oppression was taking place?)
(P.S. I aint your bro)
Wow. Very classy style of debate you possess...
But what do I know, I'm sitting in the lowly shit-stain of Oklahoma.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 11:37
Absolutely agree.
The one's pushing these types of policies/laws:
Aren't the ones who have to physically enforce them.
Aren't going to be dealing with negative public perception of LE.
Are going to be reaping the spoils, in terms of resume-padding, etc.
So, basically, shit like CAF is a means to use beat cops as tools for some shitbag's political career.
****ing pathetic. As usual as of late in this country: Epic. Leadership. Fail.
I've said before the problem is one that's top down. Any issues with law enforcement are generally a symptom of the piss poor laws they're given to enforce, for which they're doing the best they can with the tools available.
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 11:40
Do you even,
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51b1xX6qEtL._AA300_.jpg
Bro?
So, just to clarify, can you find any post where I've mentioned I agree with asset forfeiture, bro? I'll save you some time, bro. You cant.
With that said, I like to point out that none of the mental midgets that are acting like complete buffoons in this thread have any idea what the Agencies policy requires to use this software. If someone is stopped with 500lbs of dope and has 6 dozen prepaid cards on them, I would hope they would be confiscated and logged into evidence. Same goes to the afore mentioned human trafficking scenario which was turned into a joke. Do I agree with pulling the money off the cards? No. But seizing them is a no brainer. Do I honestly give a shit about some coyote losing all his money...not really.
But hey, bro, I guess this gives you a reason not to go to the shit stain known as Oklahoma (or did you even know where this tyrannical oppression was taking place?)
(P.S. I aint your bro)
Its a simple issue of "you have no idea what you're taking about". Whats the policy of the use of this tech? Can you even articulate what "probable cause" is? Have you done any research beyond reading the tiny exert provided in the OP?
No you don't, haven't, and wont. Yep, its that simple.
So, do you have any knowledge of the policy?
I'm pretty sure I know what probable cause is and based on what I read scanning prepaid Visa cards is a fishing expedition.
The first thing that is missing from the story is how the troops come into possession of the cards in the first place. The article certainly does not mention any thing about '500 pounds of dope.' The totality of circumstances is entirely different if there have been drugs discovered.
The article does mention that Oklahoma Highway Patrol gives 7.7% of anything seized to the company that supplies scanners. No profit motive there, huh?
I've been an LEO and trained LEO's for the last 40 years. It has been my passion. Shit like asset forfeiture makes a mockery of the principles of law enforcement and our Constitution.
Problem is too many folks base their study and knowledge of the Constitution to the Bill of Rights, and then only to the 2nd Amendment. They kind of skip over everything else.
So, do you have any knowledge of the policy?
.
No, because the craptastic agenda driven sensationalist scare piece didn't include actual facts and information. Which is why I haven't gone all "chicken little". You make my point in your second sentence.
Wow. Very classy style of debate you possess...
But what do I know, I'm sitting in the lowly shit-stain of Oklahoma.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thank you, and my apologies. Nobody should have to go experience that.
KalashniKEV
06-10-16, 11:49
Meme... too... perfect...
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/4a/4a695db9b2b1eb2307573d6fff9dc75ec59f7a2b9c4ec7741b668e10b5da2377.jpg
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 11:51
ROFLCOPTER!!!!!
Meme... too... perfect...
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/4a/4a695db9b2b1eb2307573d6fff9dc75ec59f7a2b9c4ec7741b668e10b5da2377.jpg
Thank you, and my apologies. Nobody should have to go experience that.
Lol. You're so clever.
And on behalf of me and my fellow shitstains....
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160610/31f41c5f44ad11400a06cc42033d6394.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No bro you shouldnt chill, everyone is out to steal your money. No reason, just out to get your money. Remember?
They probably need to $$$ to build the fema camps too huh??
Without getting into a pointless pissing match;
There was a time when people were concerned with how many knuckleheads you took off the street. Anything else is irrelevant.
But now it is money, money, money....and no. You aren't bankrupting these people but you are adding to coffers which Chiefs and Sheriffs are far more proud of than how many knuckleheads have been put away.
If I, in your hypothetical question, came up on Jose Cuervo and a truck full of girls...
My First and Main priority is securing him and getting the females healthcare. Somebody knows something. Then I'll get more agencies involved, including federal as it is interstate crime, and will figure out some way of getting the main guy. Anonymous prepaid cards are just that. Aside from latent prints, they are no good to me. They get logged as evidence. After however long homeboy is jailed for, he can get them back.
My priority is and always has been people.
Not a Marine, but look into Smedley Butler. Essentially his gripes are more relevant now than ever.
He personally destroyed a lot of people and had every right to call BS on why he was told to do it.
He said 'War is a Racket'. I say 'Policework is a Racket'.
The paradigm has shifted from getting garbage off the street to 'seizures and forfeitures'.
I have a huge problem with that. It makes a harlot of what should be a moral and ethical profession.
I don't care about toys or gear. I did time with a single stack,wood stock shotgun, leather gear, and polyester uniform.
So that's where I'm at. Feel free to agree or disagree but lately I've become a lot more skeptical of agency heads and their motvations.
Aren't the ones who have to physically enforce them.
Aren't going to be dealing with negative public perception of LE.
Are going to be reaping the spoils, in terms of resume-padding, etc.
I've heard it said they're not in the hazard class ie the class of people who have to pay the price for their BS. Who cares if Obamacare destroys the healthcare system, the politicians are exempt. Who cares if CAF destroys the relationship between citizenry and the police? The politicians don't have to deal with the police when riding in their armed guard motorcades. Who cares if the public is bled dry for public schools that suck? The politicians send their kids to private school.
So, basically, shit like CAF is a means to use beat cops as tools for some shitbag's political career.
****ing pathetic. As usual as of late in this country: Epic. Leadership. Fail.
It's an extension of "feel good" public policy on the law and order side of the political house. CAF doesn't actually accomplish much if anything but it makes people "feel" like you're taking action. And to politicians, feelings are more important than outcomes. Because really, even if you seized enough to cut the cartels profit margins by 50%, do you think that's gonna make em hang it up? And how much do you think is actually seized? 0.1%?
Money and vehicle seizures have corrupted departments. I know of one in Louisiana that ripped off anybody passing through if they might get away with it. Out of state travelers were at risk especially. If vehicles and money are seized, then proceeds should go into some general fund and even then not be ear marked for specific purpose. Let's let losing toys and money be one of several consequences for bad guys.
OK. That made me chuckle
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
No bro you shouldnt chill, everyone is out to steal your money. No reason, just out to get your money. Remember?
They probably need to $$$ to build the fema camps too huh??
J-Dub, I respect you. You aren't in Oklahoma, are you? I ask because some of us are. We have a former sheriff under GJ indictment for this and stories where Oklahoma LEO's have seized money they couldn't connect to illicit activity, was shown to be from legal activity, but have refused to return without media attention, legislative intervention and lawsuits. Regardless of whether you can get a prosecutor to go after the thieves (you can't), that is theft.
Now I'm all for seizing the money when you have PC. You find wads of cash and trafficked women or distribution weight drugs? Snatch it up! That's now what we're discussing here. When you're seizing $10K off musicians, car dealers and immigrants who don't trust the banking system, that's wrong. Like it or not, its happening. And when you refuse to give it back, even when you can't get a DA in the world to prosecute on that seizure, there's not a law in the land that excuses the immortality of it. It is LEO's acting immorally. THAT undermines the trust in LE across the board.
We've been fighting this problem in Oklahoma for several years now. And instead of enacting a single law, or even an internal policy restricting the use of this "tool", the head agency in the state is actively pursuing even more capabilities to continue it. That is disturbing. The local news is reporting more and more on this. They're getting a few details wrong like they always do, but they're getting the gist of it right.
So I ask you, how many innocent people getting their money stolen on the side of the road is it worth for this " tool"? I'm serious because this is a SERIOUS problem. So how many? One? Ten? A hundred?
Or can we agree that roadside interdiction should return to focusing on the commodity instead of the cash? There are plenty of tools available to LE for fighting the war on drugs. This one isn't worth the collateral damage, to the pubic or the reputation of law enforcement. :(
J-Dub, are you OK with the concept of punishment without conviction? Are you OK with the idea of prove your innocence instead of the gov proving guilt?
Civil asset forfeitures are the above. Assets are taken from people who have not been convicted of any wrong doing and then those individuals have to go and prove that they had a right to the property. How in the hell is that right by any stretch of the imagination?
In your hypothetical pimp with hoes and prepaid Visa cards. Why do you need to drain the cards? They aren't going anywhere. If have probable cause to arrest the individual those cards along with whatever else you collect is locked into evidence is it not? Where is the $$ going to go. Why does the arresting agency need to transfer the funds into its own account? If they prosecute and convict the cards then be dealt with. My choice would be to have it given back to the tax payers of the community. If they don't prosecute or don't get a conviction those cards get IMMEDIATELY returned to the owner. Not wait for the owner to sue in civil court, wait for ABC news to show up and ask what happened...
Was t the whole idea behind the prove guilt beyond any shadow of doubt that we as a society would rather have 1000 criminal set free than 1 innocent railroaded? How is this whole punish first and then figure out guilt or innocence adhere to that premise.
The irony: we cant figure out a way to put and keep murderers, rapists and such behind bars and essentially have a revolving door for violent folks; but we sure as shit can figure out how to get some money and goods seized. ****ed up priorities is an understatement.
J-Dub, I respect you. You aren't in Oklahoma, are you? I ask because some of us are. We have a former sheriff under GJ indictment for this and stories where Oklahoma LEO's have seized money they couldn't connect to illicit activity, was shown to be from legal activity, but have refused to return without media attention, legislative intervention and lawsuits. Regardless of whether you can get a prosecutor to go after the thieves (you can't), that is theft.
Now I'm all for seizing the money when you have PC. You find wads of cash and trafficked women or distribution weight drugs? Snatch it up! That's now what we're discussing here. When you're seizing $10K off musicians, car dealers and immigrants who don't trust the banking system, that's wrong. Like it or not, its happening. And when you refuse to give it back, even when you can't get a DA in the world to prosecute on that seizure, there's not a law in the land that excuses the immortality of it. It is LEO's acting immorally. THAT undermines the trust in LE across the board.
We've been fighting this problem in Oklahoma for several years now. And instead of enacting a single law, or even an internal policy restricting the use of this "tool", the head agency in the state is actively pursuing even more capabilities to continue it. That is disturbing. The local news is reporting more and more on this. They're getting a few details wrong like they always do, but they're getting the gist of it right.
So I ask you, how many innocent people getting their money stolen on the side of the road is it worth for this " tool"? I'm serious because this is a SERIOUS problem. So how many? One? Ten? A hundred?
Or can we agree that roadside interdiction should return to focusing on the commodity instead of the cash? There are plenty of tools available to LE for fighting the war on drugs. This one isn't worth the collateral damage, to the pubic or the reputation of law enforcement. :(
Well said.
For the record, I don't give a flying F about interdiction, drug charges, drugs in general, or asset forfeitures. Far too much paperwork for little if any positive outcome. If you don't like the laws, elect people that will change them. If that's too hard, move (as stated before, OK is a shithole, but don't move south)
Again I apologize for not taking the bait in the OP. Don't ask questions, don't look at anything with an objective thought process. It involves police, must be bad. Actual information is not needed to form an intelligent opinion.
Sorry to interrupt the regularly scheduled over reaction without any information programming.
At one time, you had to worry about carrying large sums of cash and getting stopped for a moving violation. Now the target is a pre-paid credit/debit card? If they can drain that account, I can see LE collecting your speeding fine alongside the highway with a wi-fi enabled point of sale (violation) card reader. It brings to mind some Carhop at the drive in burger joint on roller skates and nickel plated coin changer on the hip. Add the paper hat and the image is complete.
Who says crime doesn't pay? It's True....Municipalities and States aren't making any money investigating burglaries or criminal damage to property, but put LE out on the prowl running traffic and there's a whole lot of money to be made.
For the record, I don't give a flying F about interdiction, drug charges, drugs in general, or asset forfeitures. Far too much paperwork for little if any positive outcome. If you don't like the laws, elect people that will change them. If that's too hard, move (as stated before, OK is a shithole, but don't move south)
Again I apologize for not taking the bait in the OP. Don't ask questions, don't look at anything with an objective thought process. It involves police, must be bad. Actual information is not needed to form an intelligent opinion.
Sorry to interrupt the regularly scheduled over reaction without any information programming.
You know, you keep saying that...and yet it's other LEOs who are contradicting you. So the "LEO haters" angle doesn't fly.
As to your continued disparagement of the entire state of Oklahoma...I've lived in several states (Texas included) and Ok is no worse than any other and better than most.
I've come to the conclusion your experience here must have been in the company of the wrong people. Which, given your contributions to this thread anyway, makes perfect sense.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For the record, I don't give a flying F about interdiction, drug charges, drugs in general, or asset forfeitures. Far too much paperwork for little if any positive outcome. If you don't like the laws, elect people that will change them. If that's too hard, move (as stated before, OK is a shithole, but don't move south)
Again I apologize for not taking the bait in the OP. Don't ask questions, don't look at anything with an objective thought process. It involves police, must be bad. Actual information is not needed to form an intelligent opinion.
Sorry to interrupt the regularly scheduled over reaction without any information programming.
Sorry J-Dub, but you're absolutely wrong here. I've worked LE and I'm an Okie with 50 years here (minus .mil and 2 years in TX). You got this one wrong. There's a real issue, it's serious and dismissing it as clickbait or LEO bashing is wrong. I understand you don't like how this looks and neither do I, but an honest appraisal encompassing the facts is warranted. I hope you can do that and make a better case, because the knee jerk reaction on this one seems to be coming from the South. :(
So when they stop a pimp hauling underage girls across the country with a stack of prepaid VISA debit cards with 100k on them they shouldn't look into that?
How bout the black farmer in overalls on his way to buy a tractor with $8k cash. No priors, and witnesses confirming his story. That had to fight to get it back with a lawyer, and even then the agency practice is to settle for 25-50%.
CAF is being horribly misapplied. Far beyond the scope of its intent. And has changed the behavior of some agencies in questionable directions.
You can be against CAF misuse and not be anti-LEO. Shoot, even many LEO see the problem with how it's being used.
If that is your "bank account" then I guess the title isn't completely misleading.
That was my bad, the article that linked to the one I posted said bank accounts, so as I was writing the OP, I decided to check the source directly and re-wrote some stuff before hitting "post", but forgot to change the actual title of the post.
I fixed the title for clarity. This is the link that was originally sent to me, but as I didn't recognize the site I checked more reputable sources: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/americas-current-economy/oklahoma-police-can-seize-your-entire-bank-account-on-a-traffic-stop-without-any-charges-at-all/
Edit: 5News also says bank account, not just armstrongeconomics. http://5newsonline.com/2016/06/08/ohp-uses-new-device-to-seize-money-from-bank-accounts/
How bout the black farmer in overalls on his way to buy a tractor with $8k cash. No priors, and witnesses confirming his story. That had to fight to get it back with a lawyer, and even then the agency practice is to settle for 25-50%.
CAF is being horribly misapplied. Far beyond the scope of its intent. And has changed the behavior of some agencies in questionable directions.
You can be against CAF misuse and not be anti-LEO. Shoot, even many LEO see the problem with how it's being used.
My question is, how in the world does the Officer become aware of such cash? Surely its not in plain view? PC to search the vehicle? Some idiot telling an Officer "psssst I got 8k in ma wallet!". Why would that even come up?
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 18:52
http://youtu.be/e8wWodDfCx4
My question is, how in the world does the Officer become aware of such cash? Surely its not in plain view? PC to search the vehicle? Some idiot telling an Officer "psssst I got 8k in ma wallet!". Why would that even come up?
http://youtu.be/e8wWodDfCx4
The correct answer would be..."no". Same goes for "do you consent to a search of your vehicle?"..."no". And in one clip the Officer was already searching the vehicle.
There are bad Police out there. There are bad soldiers, bad doctors, bad moms, bad dads. I get it. Like I said before, if you don't like the forfeiture laws, get them changed.
But again, this thread is about a very specific topic/article, which is very short on very specific FACTS. That's my entire point, which Im sure doesn't matter.
The correct answer would be..."no".
I've never lied to an officer while being stopped, but if you do lie to the officer, does your world turn to shit really fast?
"Do you have more than $5k in cash in your vehicle?"
"No." <- the lie
Outlander Systems
06-10-16, 19:27
Obviously, J-Dub is not an attorney.
'Round here, that'd be considered obstruction of justice, which could result in possible criminal charges.
I've never lied to an officer while being stopped, but if you do lie to the officer, does your world turn to shit really fast?
"Do you have more than $5k in cash in your vehicle?"
"No." <- the lie
I've never lied to an officer while being stopped, but if you do lie to the officer, does your world turn to shit really fast?
"Do you have more than $5k in cash in your vehicle?"
"No." <- the lie
Regardless of whether you say yes or no, the next step is ask to search. The correct response is "I'm not answering questions sir, am I free to go?"
J-Dub, when you find yourself in a hole, it's best to stop digging. Just sayin...
The reality is that it is legal for the police to lie to you, but illegal to lie to the police
Not fair, kinda chickenshit, but legal all the same in most if not all states and certainly under Federal law.
All you can legally do is remain silent but that will just upset some less well versed officers and they may overreact.
And no, I don't like it either and would like to think most people wouldn't resort to such tactics. But a lot do.
My question is, how in the world does the Officer become aware of such cash? Surely its not in plain view? PC to search the vehicle? Some idiot telling an Officer "psssst I got 8k in ma wallet!". Why would that even come up?
Get real... the pressure to "mind if I take a look inside" from some is very real and routine. And people, especially older ones who know they are not doing anything wrong, often say yes sir.
It's wrong, and CAF gives an incentive to push that front.
In the case I mentioned, the article said he had it in a paper grocery sack.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-10-16, 22:12
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/06/appeals-court-rules-cops-can-legally-search-a-seized-credit-card-with-no-warrant/
'Tailgating' leads to a stop, which the cop 'smells' weed and there are three air fresheners in car. Drug dog doesn't find drugs, but the search (did it have to be consented at this point?) finds cards, some of which are bogus. Not the same thing the topic, but the case hinged on whether the magnetic strip was protected from search by the 4th, and it is not.
So basically, if you have an ATM card that is connected with your checking and saving account, there is the potential for all your money to be seized. Not saying that is going to happen to a lilly white traveller that is totally innocent, but at this point it is a risk.
As in the case above, the search was from two layers of BS.
How do they secure funds if there is a PIN number associated with the card? Can they make you turn on an open your phone to get card info off your phone?
I have no problem with CAF when done accordingly; with probable cause, or under warrant (oath or affirmation), or within the seven exceptions to the 4th (not including open fields, I do not agree with that exception), under the standard of review-objectionable reasonableness. I also do not believe they should be aloud to sell or auction seized property before a conviction and all appeals exhausted. I highly disagree with the fair market value reasoning if they so happen to sell or auction property before someone can be found not guilty/acquitted/charges dismissed. I definitely have a huge problem when they refuse to return property after such dispositions or improperly seizing property and people having to sue under 1983 or similar.
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/f5/f5a3309ff72782bd6618b816ba7d3d7f231a2867aa56ff51d4d78d2a2321dd41.jpg
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/06/appeals-court-rules-cops-can-legally-search-a-seized-credit-card-with-no-warrant/
'Tailgating' leads to a stop, which the cop 'smells' weed and there are three air fresheners in car. Drug dog doesn't find drugs, but the search (did it have to be consented at this point?) finds cards, some of which are bogus. Not the same thing the topic, but the case hinged on whether the magnetic strip was protected from search by the 4th, and it is not.
So basically, if you have an ATM card that is connected with your checking and saving account, there is the potential for all your money to be seized. Not saying that is going to happen to a lilly white traveller that is totally innocent, but at this point it is a risk.
As in the case above, the search was from two layers of BS.
How do they secure funds if there is a PIN number associated with the card? Can they make you turn on an open your phone to get card info off your phone?
It does happen that way. Stopped a typical hoodmobile. No seatbelts and speeding less than 10. When I walk up, all that's missing was the Cheech & Chong sized cloud of smoke. Seriously, the smell of weed was massive. All three subjects are fully compliant and even dare I say it? Nice. Regardless, I call for backers because its procedure. Search of the vehicle only comes up with a couple of seeds. Yep, they'd already smoked it all and admitted as much. 48/49 comes back negative and local r&w only reveals a couple of misdemeanor possession citations. I cited the driver for the seatbelts and they were on their way.
The circuit court ruling on mag stripes is crap. The lie they told in the ruling about what information it provides access to is so preposterous, its insulting they even uttered it. :(
I would like to note that I also think under CAF with a guilty conviction, that if they cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the property seized was obtained via illegal means then they must turn the property over to a family member or someone under POA.
The correct answer would be..."no". Same goes for "do you consent to a search of your vehicle?"..."no". And in one clip the Officer was already searching the vehicle.
There are bad Police out there. There are bad soldiers, bad doctors, bad moms, bad dads. I get it. Like I said before, if you don't like the forfeiture laws, get them changed.
Ok, got it. Lie to the police. Thanks for that.
Next item: If I don't like the law, I can just get it changed. Awesome! Why didn't I think of this before? I suffered through 10 years of the first AWB for nothing. I could have just had them change it. Tell me: If I don't like the elected president, can I just have them change that too?
Last item: Every time I don't like a law in my current state, I can just pack up my stuff, quit my job, gather up the family, bid farewell to all the local friends and family, and beat feet. Man, what a great, simple, easy solution to all this government and federal corruption. Just leave. And then leave again. And keep on leaving. Tell me, where do I go during times like the Clinton federal AWB? Was there a state in the Union that wasn't enforcing that? Or are we to all pack up and leave the whole country when illegal, unjust, unwanted, federal laws are passed? If the police have unjustly seized my assets without even so much as charging me with a crime, how do I pay to leave? It costs quite a bit of money to move. If they did decide to charge me with some crime, am I allowed to pack up and leave the state?
You are not thinking this thing through. When any branch of government does something unjust or illegal, it should be brought to the attention of "we the people". It should be discussed, understood and complained about. Discussing it, understanding what is going on and why, and complaining about it, IS the first step to getting it changed. This thread is one step in following your advice of getting these CAF laws changed. We've got to know about it, in order to change it, right?
This is outside the scope of draining pre-paid credit/debit cards, but there are numerous instances of cash being confiscated from drivers being stopped for minor moving violations. It just seems the ones taking the money are getting more sophisticated. I know people who buy cars and other high ticket items on e-Bay and when they arrive to pick up the vehicle, it's a cash deal.
If I'm on my way out of State to buy a vehicle or something and I get stopped in Hooterville for going 5 over the posted limed, and Deputy Butterbean asks me if I'm carrying a lot of money, I know a shakedown is in the thought process. I would explain that his question is outside the nature of the traffic stop and start asserting my 4th Amendment Rights. Also, an on board video dash camera would be rolling as well, pointed in the position where the action is taking place. I'm sure at that point I would be accused of "disrespetin' his authoritah", but if it's a matter of principle and Constitutional Rights. I would go to jail for refusing to answer such questions.
"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 offense 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."
"Tenny mucho mucho dinero in su trucky trailor"
Solid survival spanish right there.
The strumpet from Full Metal Jacket sounded more eloquent, dare I say....poetic, by comparison
Outlander Systems
06-11-16, 16:22
An old coworker, Jose, taught me, "Morroco no con noto no tonos."
He said it was the best way to **** with gringos. He also informed me that all the Spanish I know is completely vulgar. I told his ass that I was fluent in kitchen Espanol.
Officer friendly may have one-upped me in Spanglish.
"Tenny mucho mucho dinero in su trucky trailor"
Solid survival spanish right there.
The strumpet from Full Metal Jacket sounded more eloquent, dare I say....poetic, by comparison
Anything with Morricon is automatically vulgar. the rest is a tongue twister like would it be "don't notice no tune" but more profane? Or something.
like "he dunno what i'm saying"?
I think my favorite spanish swear is 'boca a mierda'.
Spanish swearing is fun... es como limpiar el culo con la seda.
Outlander Systems
06-11-16, 18:19
Lol.
Shit, ese.
Comes mis juevos en barbacoa.
Anything with Morricon is automatically vulgar. the rest is a tongue twister like would it be "don't notice no tune" but more profane? Or something.
like "he dunno what i'm saying"?
I think my favorite spanish swear is 'boca a mierda'.
Spanish swearing is fun... es como limpiar el culo con la seda.
Obviously, J-Dub is not an attorney.
'Round here, that'd be considered obstruction of justice, which could result in possible criminal charges.
Wrong. Having cash in the car is not a crime in and of itself (especially without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of crime outside of a traffic violation) , therefore lying about not committing a crime is not a crime. Also, just refuse to answer the question if you like.
Outlander Systems
06-11-16, 19:07
Redacted.
Wrong. Having cash in the car is not a crime in and of itself (especially without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of crime outside of a traffic violation) , therefore lying about not committing a crime is not a crime. Also, just refuse to answer the question if you like.
Keep digging J-D, there's gotta be some Terra firma down there somewhere! ;)
eightmillimeter
06-11-16, 22:00
How bout the black farmer in overalls on his way to buy a tractor with $8k cash. No priors, and witnesses confirming his story. That had to fight to get it back with a lawyer, and even then the agency practice is to settle for 25-50%.
CAF is being horribly misapplied. Far beyond the scope of its intent. And has changed the behavior of some agencies in questionable directions.
You can be against CAF misuse and not be anti-LEO. Shoot, even many LEO see the problem with how it's being used.
The human trafficking was my example not his. I guess I am just missing something here and I fully admit it may be different in other areas of the country. I have been working for a pretty substantial agency in the Midwest for years, in a state known for "criminal interdiction" along major highways. I have never once in ten years been told, emailed, or even suggested to seize property via forfeiture even on cases where cash was present, not once. The media has a general bad attitude against the idea lately, but in every case they cite (in my area) the stuff was tied to crime in obvious ways. I just don't see the abuse of it here in my area. If people are misusing it, then that's wrong. CAF when used responsibly is a very powerful tool against major crime players.
J-Dub, are you OK with the concept of punishment without conviction? Are you OK with the idea of prove your innocence instead of the gov proving guilt?
Civil asset forfeitures are the above. Assets are taken from people who have not been convicted of any wrong doing and then those individuals have to go and prove that they had a right to the property. How in the hell is that right by any stretch of the imagination?
In your hypothetical pimp with hoes and prepaid Visa cards. Why do you need to drain the cards? They aren't going anywhere. If have probable cause to arrest the individual those cards along with whatever else you collect is locked into evidence is it not? Where is the $$ going to go. Why does the arresting agency need to transfer the funds into its own account?
Again I'm not sure what's going on here but what's actually happening with these machines? Is money actually instantly transferred from the card to another account? If it is that's nuts.
The agency I work for has seized millions in cash, as well as stolen credit cards and "load it up" type cards, but once they get seized I don't know how the forfeiture process works. I've never seized anything with CAF, I wouldn't even know how if I wanted to, guess I'm not special enough. It's not something I've ever been pressured to do, or even trained... Which goes to my earlier reply. If this is being abused that's obviously bad, but again, in my neighborhood I don't see abuse of it.
The correct answer would be..."no". Same goes for "do you consent to a search of your vehicle?"..."no". And in one clip the Officer was already searching the vehicle.
There are bad Police out there..
Yes there are bad police out there, there are also more poorly trained police out there than bad police.
I think I've related this before but I'll repeat it: We do repricocity classes a couple times a year for out of state officers wanting to transfer their certifications. They are a week and consist primarily of Constitutional Law, State Statute, Traffic Code and a cold barrel qual. One of the Legal Instructors told me over lunch that one of the officer, I'll let you guess what state he came from, asked her - 'that 4th Amendment, doe it apply everyplace?'
So, maybe he was a moron, or, maybe, his trainers didn't know WTF they were doing. My experience tells me in most cases it is the latter.
I've seen training films used by 'expert' instructors teaching PERF developed curriculum that contain blatantly unconstitutional actions which go unaddressed. In one class one of the officers attending raised his hand and said 'Well, yeah they appear to be biased, but isn't the bigger problem the unconstitutional search?' He had to explain to the 'expert' instructor from guess what large southern agency.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/06/appeals-court-rules-cops-can-legally-search-a-seized-credit-card-with-no-warrant/
Not saying that is going to happen to a lilly white traveller that is totally innocent, but at this point it is a risk.
Not bagging on you, but, that is the crux of the issue - why did you mention lily-white?
1) Vulgarity in other languages is as unwelcome as it is in english. Clean it up.
2) Lighten up. It's just another social-issues discussion in the GD. If you can't keep it about issues rather than members, or if it drives your BP up more than 10 points, take a break.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-12-16, 01:24
Not bagging on you, but, that is the crux of the issue - why did you mention lily-white?
More laziness than anything as a way to say someone beyond the pale of standard suspicion. Crap, I did it again.
What is the percent of people that will get caught up in this? 1 in 1000 stops? 1 in a million of the general population. The chances of getting your life savings seized for most people is probably less than that of winning over $100 in Powerball. Does the chance go up if you fall into a group that might be suspected of nefarious behavior, or have less resources to fight back? I'm sensitive to the fact that these tactics can (are?) used on people least able to stand up for themselves.
I was originally going to expand and write more, but time is time.
Living in Colorado and rolling around the West this summer in a nice big SUV, I'm sensitive to stories about people being pulled over in adjoining states for not signalling long enough before changing lanes and having dogs alert.
More laziness than anything as a way to say someone beyond the pale of standard suspicion. Crap, I did it again.
What is the percent of people that will get caught up in this? 1 in 1000 stops? 1 in a million of the general population. The chances of getting your life savings seized for most people is probably less than that of winning over $100 in Powerball.
You do understand that someone could make the same argument about the need to CCW, don't you? Rights are rights. Ethics are ethics. Moral and just is moral and just. They don't change based on percentages.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-12-16, 23:51
You do understand that someone could make the same argument about the need to CCW, don't you? Rights are rights. Ethics are ethics. Moral and just is moral and just. They don't change based on percentages.
Cripes, I try to be understanding and this is what I get. My point was the chances that most of driving thru OK and pulled over for speeding aren't going to have are bank accounts drained. My point was that perhaps if with English as a second language, some indicators the coincide with illegal activity and innocent people- and people with out the resources to legal advice- could have everything they had tied up. I have a buddy who defends pro athletes. I'm sure I could get him (pay him) to fix this pretty fast.
I'm trying to be cognizant of things beyond my own frame of reference and it seems people think the worse of me for it.
The general consensus is that pre-paid debit cards are far more frequently used by immigrants (both legal and illegal), the poor, other minority groups and the young, such as college students. As a result, the people most likely to get caught in the trawl net who aren't criminals, are the very people with the fewest resources to fight the seizure and get their property back.
Cripes, I try to be understanding and this is what I get. My point was the chances that most of driving thru OK and pulled over for speeding aren't going to have are bank accounts drained. My point was that perhaps if with English as a second language, some indicators the coincide with illegal activity and innocent people- and people with out the resources to legal advice- could have everything they had tied up. I have a buddy who defends pro athletes. I'm sure I could get him (pay him) to fix this pretty fast.
I'm trying to be cognizant of things beyond my own frame of reference and it seems people think the worse of me for it.
Not at all. I can see how you'd think that, I apologize. Just discussing.
Not saying you, but I noticed during the birth of the Asian gangs in our state's largest city, the folks that were advocating checkpoints where you were searched for guns, didn't necessarily think they needed one in their neighborhood. They would have raised hell if they had to pass through a checkpoint to get home, that shit is for other people. I'm serious, a group of rocket scientists advocated that.
The general consensus is that pre-paid debit cards are far more frequently used by immigrants (both legal and illegal), the poor, other minority groups and the young, such as college students. As a result, the people most likely to get caught in the trawl net who aren't criminals, are the very people with the fewest resources to fight the seizure and get their property back.
Excellent Point !!!!!
http://www.officer.com/video/12220768/oklahoma-highway-patrol-hopes-to-dispel-erad-rumors
Oh my goodness, actual information on how these are going to be used.....not vague sensational spin...crazy.
Outlander Systems
06-14-16, 11:35
If there's PC for suspected fraud, arrest the driver, throw the cards in evidence, and sort it out in a courtroom.
Why is that so hard to understand?
http://www.officer.com/video/12220768/oklahoma-highway-patrol-hopes-to-dispel-erad-rumors
Oh my goodness, actual information on how these are going to be used.....not vague sensational spin...crazy.
If there's PC for suspected fraud, arrest the driver, throw the cards in evidence, and sort it out in a courtroom.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Why is it so hard for you to understand I have an issue with the pathetic excuse called "reporting" in the op link. The link I just provided explained how many are in use, and what will and will not be done with them. Which the original post link did not.
Do you still not understand? I have not once stated I agreed with the use of these or any device or policy related to asset forfeitures. Why is it so hard to comprehend?
Outlander Systems
06-14-16, 11:39
:rolleyes:
So these devices will NEVER be used for asset forfeiture.
Got it.
Why is it so hard for you to understand I have an issue with the pathetic excuse called "reporting" in the op link. The link I just provided explained how many are in use, and what will and will not be done with them. Which the original post link did not.
Do you still not understand?
:rolleyes:
So these devices will NEVER be used for asset forfeiture.
Got it.
I don't know. Call OK HP and ask, we'd all like to know. See I'm interested in actual information on the Op subject, which the original joke of an article was short on.....but that's just me.
Outlander Systems
06-14-16, 12:03
Oklahoma State Representatives are apparently looking into it.
I suppose we'll eventually find out.
I don't know. Call OK HP and ask, we'd all like to know. See I'm interested in actual information on the Op subject, which the original joke of an article was short on.....but that's just me.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.