4 ms·
I'm pretty sure the speaker was trying to point out a few examples which he thought the audience would sympathize were unlikely to be threats or otherwise engag
by Roboprog 10y ago
I'm pretty sure the speaker was trying to point out a few examples which he thought the audience would sympathize were unlikely to be threats or otherwise engaged in criminal activity.
Of course all of these forfeitures stink of illegality, regardless of the victim. Forth Amendment? Never heard of it, apparently.
- SixSigma 10y agoYes, undoubtedly that was the idea. But "Vulnerable person exploited" is really less of a story than "police rob citizens". You could add "at gunpoint" to bait it.
- jandrese 10y agoI'm sure they're going to use that bullshit legal reasoning that because the money committed the crime, the money itself can be held responsible and seized, and money doesn't have 4th amendment protections because it's not a person.
- tremon 10y agoYet if it's not a person, it can't be convicted of a crime either. Has a dog ever been charged for biting, instead of its owner?
- jandrese 10y agoWhat makes you think money can't be put on trial? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U.S._Currency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._$124,700_in_U...
- tremon 10y agoOh I'm aware of that. I was pointing out the logical inconsistency between "not a person, so no 4th amendment" and "not a person, so no case"
- cmdrfred 10y agoThere is no logic here. The 4th amendment clearly states papers are protected, cash is paper. It's protected no matter what retarded logic you use.
- SixSigma 10y agoLots of times, plenty also found guilty, including a swarm of crickets who were excommunicated. http://www.wired.com/2014/09/fantastically-wrong-europes-insane-history-putting-animals-trial-executing/ http://www.wired.com/2014/09/fantastically-wrong-europes-ins...