9 ms·

> Various chain emails over the past seven years have warned readers about the possibility of Homeland Security seizing items like gold, silver and guns from th

> Various chain emails over the past seven years have warned readers about the possibility of Homeland Security seizing items like gold, silver and guns from their safe deposit boxes at the bank. This isn’t possible without first obtaining a search warrant, since those boxes are private property. And banking officials told us random seizures just aren’t happening. We rate this statement Pants on Fire. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/jul/26/chain-email/homeland-security-can-seize-safe-deposit-boxes-wit/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2013/jul/26/chain-emai... Perhaps it's still just a conspiracy theory with respect to the DHS rather than the FBI. It doesn't seem to be out of line with civil asset forfeiture policy, other than it being from safe deposit boxes rather than vehicles or luggage. > Law enforcement took more stuff from people than burglars did last year (2015) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...

gowld 5y ago
Please read the article you linked. "forfeiture" has surpassed burglary; and most of that is criminal forfeiture, after a conviction, returning stolen property or paying a fine. The biggest single chunk is what Bernie Madoff stole.
- hirundo 5y ago
  Here's the conclusion of the article after reviewing those details, including Madoff: "Still, boil down all the numbers and caveats above and you arrive at a simple fact: In the United States, in 2014, more cash and property transferred hands via civil asset forfeiture than via burglary. "
  - gruez 5y ago
    The implication that the author wants to make is that the cops are worse than the criminals, and that's the conclusion most people will make on first reading of it. However, after further inspection that's totally acceptable, because cops mostly (?) go after bad people, whereas criminals mostly go after innocent people. It's like saying "police are responsible for more kidnappings (aka. arrests) than criminals". Technically true, but misleading.
    - voxic11 5y ago
      Where do you get the idea that criminals target innocent people? The few statistics I have seen indicate criminals tend to target other criminals because they are less likely to go to the police if a crime is committed against them.
      - gruez 5y ago
        source?
    - stjohnswarts 5y ago
      Not really, they just want you to realize what a scam it is and that cops/feds are stealing from people for no reason other than personal and departmental gains to flex their power. It's rather common in certain states. Along with basically illegal search by K9 cops on false triggers of vehicles. This happened to me in Texas. I refused them searching my car (had a brake light out), the cop got in a huff, said I had to wait until they brought a k9 out (thought he "smelled marijuana"). Full disclosure, I've never smoked pot or done any narcotic of any kind but I did have a pot brownie in college once. They search my car, the dog "triggered on something" and found absolutely zero as I knew they would (although I was a bit afraid it would be dirty cops who'd drop a dime bag somewhere). It was a complete waste of time and I'm pretty sure the cop set it all up because he was bored and I didn't submit to a voluntary search. This turned me a pretty big supporter of the cops into someone who realize they really need to be reigned in from their current fascist/military mentality.
      - zeusk 5y ago
        ikr! I wasn’t born here and when I tell my friends US police forces are better equipped than my home country’s military they just give me a stare as if it’s normal and blame it on the 2nd amendment that most cops have to carry body armor and deadly force weapons. Sounds so backwards to me, something I’d expect in Somalia and not Redmond, Washington.
        giantg2 5y ago
neither_color 5y ago
I'm not sure how chain-email debunking DHS seizures pertains to this specific case in the OP where hundreds of safety deposit boxes we seized by the FBI and there is an ongoing case over it. Fact checking blogs are notorious for selecting multiple variations of a rumor and "fact-checking" the low hanging fruit, then treating all other variants as satisfactorily debunked. >"What the government has done here is completely backward," writes Frommer. "The government cannot search every apartment in a building because the landlord is involved in a crime. After all, when somebody rents an apartment, that apartment is theirs."
- gruez 5y ago
  >"What the government has done here is completely backward," writes Frommer. "The government cannot search every apartment in a building because the landlord is involved in a crime. After all, when somebody rents an apartment, that apartment is theirs." I disagree. Let's say you "rented" a room at a crackhouse. The house later gets seized and your stack of cash is seized. Is it reasonable to show up to the police station and say "yeah that's my cash, no it wasn't involved in anything illegal, can I have it back?"
  - anamexis 5y ago
    > Let's say you "rented" a room at a crackhouse. The house later gets seized and your stack of cash is seized. Is it reasonable to show up to the police station and say "yeah that's my cash, no it wasn't involved in anything illegal, can I have it back?" Yes. Why wouldn't it be reasonable?
    - DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
      can you declare it's source? otherwise it'll be quite silly to try reclaim it
      - anamexis 5y ago
        Why wouldn’t the onus be on the police to prove you obtained it illegally?
an_opabinia 5y ago
Why is civil forfeiture such a conspiracy bugaboo in the first place?
- jandrese 5y ago
  It's not hard to imagine why people who are trying to instill distrust in the government would harp on an unpopular and frequently unjust program.
  - freshair 5y ago
    It wouldn't surprise me if the other way around happens too. Quite a lot of people started off trusting their government by default; that's what public schools mostly teach after all. But when people witness these injustices again and again year after year, is it any wonder that some people will decide to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
    - stjohnswarts 5y ago
      It happened to me (an illegal search that violated my 4th amendment rights). I have family who are cops and I believe be genuinely great people. However if only 5% of cops are dirty that's still a lot of people who can shoot you in the face and most likely get away with it.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        Similar scenario for me. I told one friend who is a trooper about it, and they said this other guy sounds like a bad cop. I literally found blatant mistakes and misconduct with everyone we dealt with as part of the system (police, magistrates, judges, DA's office, clerks, etc).
- anonymouse008 5y ago
  In the 1700s a group of people got really upset that another group of people kept taking their things without asking - they had a motto 'no taxation without representation.' That group then founded a culture around this odd distrust of monarchs, that in later generations became a distrust of governments in all forms - even going as far as to conjure fantastical secret societies like the 'illuminati' that maintain a strong thumb on the scales of justice. It's just a part of the psyche that built the U.S.A. - it's a feature, not a bug
stjohnswarts 5y ago
United States of America vs. Safety Deposit Box #R2C20, honorable Judge Civil F. Guaranteed presiding.
- pengaru 5y ago
  Nit: it's "Safe Deposit Box"
  - playeren 5y ago
    It can be either. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/safe-deposit%20box https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/safe-deposit%20bo...
SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
I'd kinda argue this article is a refutation of the fact check. If a rumor went around that the CIA is putting hidden cameras in random people's bedrooms, and it turned out that the NSA was putting hidden cameras in imprecisely-selected people's bedrooms, no way is that "pants on fire".
protomyth 5y ago
And banking officials told us random seizures just aren’t happening. Regardless if it happens or not, that is the single stupidest statement for anyone to show as proof. Of course the bank is going to say their service is secure and nothing bad ever happens. That is basically Apple's response to "touch disease" back in the day. If you are going to call yourself a fact checking site, you need to do some actual fact checking.

gowld 5y ago

Please read the article you linked. "forfeiture" has surpassed burglary; and most of that is criminal forfeiture, after a conviction, returning stolen property or paying a fine. The biggest single chunk is what Bernie Madoff stole.

hirundo 5y ago
Here's the conclusion of the article after reviewing those details, including Madoff: "Still, boil down all the numbers and caveats above and you arrive at a simple fact: In the United States, in 2014, more cash and property transferred hands via civil asset forfeiture than via burglary. "
- gruez 5y ago
  The implication that the author wants to make is that the cops are worse than the criminals, and that's the conclusion most people will make on first reading of it. However, after further inspection that's totally acceptable, because cops mostly (?) go after bad people, whereas criminals mostly go after innocent people. It's like saying "police are responsible for more kidnappings (aka. arrests) than criminals". Technically true, but misleading.
  - voxic11 5y ago
    Where do you get the idea that criminals target innocent people? The few statistics I have seen indicate criminals tend to target other criminals because they are less likely to go to the police if a crime is committed against them.
    - gruez 5y ago
      source?
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    Not really, they just want you to realize what a scam it is and that cops/feds are stealing from people for no reason other than personal and departmental gains to flex their power. It's rather common in certain states. Along with basically illegal search by K9 cops on false triggers of vehicles. This happened to me in Texas. I refused them searching my car (had a brake light out), the cop got in a huff, said I had to wait until they brought a k9 out (thought he "smelled marijuana"). Full disclosure, I've never smoked pot or done any narcotic of any kind but I did have a pot brownie in college once. They search my car, the dog "triggered on something" and found absolutely zero as I knew they would (although I was a bit afraid it would be dirty cops who'd drop a dime bag somewhere). It was a complete waste of time and I'm pretty sure the cop set it all up because he was bored and I didn't submit to a voluntary search. This turned me a pretty big supporter of the cops into someone who realize they really need to be reigned in from their current fascist/military mentality.
    - zeusk 5y ago
      ikr! I wasn’t born here and when I tell my friends US police forces are better equipped than my home country’s military they just give me a stare as if it’s normal and blame it on the 2nd amendment that most cops have to carry body armor and deadly force weapons. Sounds so backwards to me, something I’d expect in Somalia and not Redmond, Washington.
      - giantg2 5y ago

neither_color 5y ago

I'm not sure how chain-email debunking DHS seizures pertains to this specific case in the OP where hundreds of safety deposit boxes we seized by the FBI and there is an ongoing case over it. Fact checking blogs are notorious for selecting multiple variations of a rumor and "fact-checking" the low hanging fruit, then treating all other variants as satisfactorily debunked. >"What the government has done here is completely backward," writes Frommer. "The government cannot search every apartment in a building because the landlord is involved in a crime. After all, when somebody rents an apartment, that apartment is theirs."

gruez 5y ago
>"What the government has done here is completely backward," writes Frommer. "The government cannot search every apartment in a building because the landlord is involved in a crime. After all, when somebody rents an apartment, that apartment is theirs." I disagree. Let's say you "rented" a room at a crackhouse. The house later gets seized and your stack of cash is seized. Is it reasonable to show up to the police station and say "yeah that's my cash, no it wasn't involved in anything illegal, can I have it back?"
- anamexis 5y ago
  > Let's say you "rented" a room at a crackhouse. The house later gets seized and your stack of cash is seized. Is it reasonable to show up to the police station and say "yeah that's my cash, no it wasn't involved in anything illegal, can I have it back?" Yes. Why wouldn't it be reasonable?
  - DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
    can you declare it's source? otherwise it'll be quite silly to try reclaim it
    - anamexis 5y ago
      Why wouldn’t the onus be on the police to prove you obtained it illegally?

an_opabinia 5y ago

Why is civil forfeiture such a conspiracy bugaboo in the first place?

jandrese 5y ago
It's not hard to imagine why people who are trying to instill distrust in the government would harp on an unpopular and frequently unjust program.
- freshair 5y ago
  It wouldn't surprise me if the other way around happens too. Quite a lot of people started off trusting their government by default; that's what public schools mostly teach after all. But when people witness these injustices again and again year after year, is it any wonder that some people will decide to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    It happened to me (an illegal search that violated my 4th amendment rights). I have family who are cops and I believe be genuinely great people. However if only 5% of cops are dirty that's still a lot of people who can shoot you in the face and most likely get away with it.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      Similar scenario for me. I told one friend who is a trooper about it, and they said this other guy sounds like a bad cop. I literally found blatant mistakes and misconduct with everyone we dealt with as part of the system (police, magistrates, judges, DA's office, clerks, etc).
anonymouse008 5y ago
In the 1700s a group of people got really upset that another group of people kept taking their things without asking - they had a motto 'no taxation without representation.' That group then founded a culture around this odd distrust of monarchs, that in later generations became a distrust of governments in all forms - even going as far as to conjure fantastical secret societies like the 'illuminati' that maintain a strong thumb on the scales of justice. It's just a part of the psyche that built the U.S.A. - it's a feature, not a bug

stjohnswarts 5y ago

United States of America vs. Safety Deposit Box #R2C20, honorable Judge Civil F. Guaranteed presiding.

pengaru 5y ago
Nit: it's "Safe Deposit Box"
- playeren 5y ago
  It can be either. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/safe-deposit%20box https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/safe-deposit%20bo...

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago

I'd kinda argue this article is a refutation of the fact check. If a rumor went around that the CIA is putting hidden cameras in random people's bedrooms, and it turned out that the NSA was putting hidden cameras in imprecisely-selected people's bedrooms, no way is that "pants on fire".

protomyth 5y ago

And banking officials told us random seizures just aren’t happening. Regardless if it happens or not, that is the single stupidest statement for anyone to show as proof. Of course the bank is going to say their service is secure and nothing bad ever happens. That is basically Apple's response to "touch disease" back in the day. If you are going to call yourself a fact checking site, you need to do some actual fact checking.