5 ms·
In that case, wouldn't it be evidence? I genuinely don't know all the details of how this works, but I do find it disturbing that the police turn around and spe
by incongruity 10y ago
In that case, wouldn't it be evidence? I genuinely don't know all the details of how this works, but I do find it disturbing that the police turn around and spend the forfeited cash. Should they be allowed to do that with the sack of money from the bank, in your example?
- harryh 10y agoSure, if it's clear who the property is owned by it goes back to the rightful owner. But in cases where that is unclear or nonsensical (like money obtained by selling illegal drugs) it goes to the state. Where else would it go?
- CamperBob2 10y agoIt goes to the state after due process. That's not what's being described here.
- harryh 10y agoThere is due process for civil asset forfeiture.
- zentiggr 10y agoThat is the discussion going on - that what _could_ be due process is being manipulated for the various departments' purposes.
- CamperBob2 10y agoThere's a process, but it's not "due" to anything but avarice and corruption.
- harryh 10y agoIt's actually due to the well established legal procedures of our country.
- CamperBob2 10y agoI'm no Con Law scholar, but where exactly do you find a basis for United States v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency in either the writings or expressed intentions of our founders?
- incongruity 10y agoWhere else would it go? A disinterested third party - not the police department that had the power to confiscate it. The state or a specific public good - i.e.: housing/food banks etc. could work.
- harryh 10y agoI do agree with this actually. Rather that going straight to law enforcement budgets the money should go to the general coffers to be allocated by the legislature.
- incongruity 10y agoI'd rather see it directed, specifically, to needed public goods. Otherwise it becomes just another generic revenue source (i.e.: a tax) and, over-time, it becomes all too tempting to still milk it for more money. Red light cameras are a good example of this. Revenues from them (in Chicago, at least) went to the city's general fund. That didn't stop the city from reducing yellow light times to increase revenues.
- harryh 10y agoI like that goal too, but I'm not sure how to really do that. A lot of states direct all lottery money to education but that just allows the states to spend less on education out of the general fund. Ultimately money is a fungible thing. No way around that.
- incongruity 10y agoThat's certainly fair/true. FWIW, I appreciate the symbolism and/or keeping revenue streams constrained. At least that forces governments to be honest in taxation rather than allowing these back-door taxation strategies.