4 ms·

>>That would be an interesting point in the argument if true. Can you substantiate that? http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/ http://ij.org/report/policin

• kbenson 11y ago
  Similar to my reply to your sibling comment, this does not break down (from what I could see) whether the the goods were seized as illegal goods or whether there actually was someone to charge. Under critical examination, I don't think the number mean what most people assume them mean, especially in the following statement: Among DOJ civil forfeitures, 88 percent took place “administratively.” Administrative forfeitures happen automatically when a property owner fails to challenge a seizure in court for any reason, including the inability to afford a lawyer or a missed deadline to file a claim. The seized property is simply presumed “guilty” without a neutral arbiter such as a judge determining whether it should be permanently taken from its owner. All contraband seized at port without a clear attributable own or person to prosecute falls under this. All drugs and drug money illegally transferring to and from the country that were intercepted without someone present to charge (or that they decide isn't the owner) fall under this. To be fair, there may not be a lot of information around now to classify these things correctly, but that doesn't mean it's okay to take the entire amount and apply it towards one type of situation when it obviously doesn't apply.