4 ms·

Civil forfeiture is legalized theft. Rationalize its legality all you want, but it is the government agents acting like criminals. This kind of behavior flagr

Civil forfeiture is legalized theft. Rationalize its legality all you want, but it is the government agents acting like criminals. This kind of behavior flagrantly steals assets from lawful citizens. They are routinely overstepping the bounds of civil behavior, so these institutions need to be burned to the ground - literally if need be.

ctvo 4y ago
> They are routinely overstepping the bounds of civil behavior, so these institutions need to be burned to the ground - literally if need be. Or you know, work on changing the civil forfeiture laws and save the libertarian revolt talk for another issue?
- DaniloDias 4y ago
  [dead]
- voakbasda 4y ago
  Because I do not believe for one second that such a policy can be reformed? That our system has reached a stable state of endemic corruption, such that meaningful reform is no longer possible by the soap, ballot, or jury boxes?
  - ctvo 4y ago
    Burning the FBI (literally, of course) to the ground will solve your issues? Aren't you missing the military, congress, the executive branch, ... the rest of the government? Or was it merely the start of your insurrection? Being so flippant about this is how January 6th happened. Your original comment wasn't logical, it was tough person on the internet noise.
- mardifoufs 4y ago
  So any country without civil forfeiture is just following libertarian talking points? You realize america is the exception, and not allowing the police to randomly seize property isn't libertarian? It's complete partisan brain rot to defend FBI asset seizure just to own the imaginary libertarians, or because the FBI is on "your side" now. Abolishing the institution that is so eagerly participating in civil forfeiture would be a pretty moderate position outside the US.
cptskippy 4y ago
> They are routinely overstepping the bounds of civil behavior... What does that even mean? Your argument starts with a statement everyone agrees with, you assert something that's a stretch to believe at best. Then you just start making things up. Finally you assert that absurd action needs to be taken. Why is it possible to burn the FBI to the ground but not reform civil forfeiture? You need to ask yourself who would benefit from dismantling the FBI, because the FBI does a lot more than civil forfeiture. The same goes for the Post Office and IRS. Someone else has a lot more to gain from dismantling those institutions than you do. They're just riling you up to carry out their agenda.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

ctvo 4y ago

> They are routinely overstepping the bounds of civil behavior, so these institutions need to be burned to the ground - literally if need be. Or you know, work on changing the civil forfeiture laws and save the libertarian revolt talk for another issue?

DaniloDias 4y ago
[dead]
voakbasda 4y ago
Because I do not believe for one second that such a policy can be reformed? That our system has reached a stable state of endemic corruption, such that meaningful reform is no longer possible by the soap, ballot, or jury boxes?
- ctvo 4y ago
  Burning the FBI (literally, of course) to the ground will solve your issues? Aren't you missing the military, congress, the executive branch, ... the rest of the government? Or was it merely the start of your insurrection? Being so flippant about this is how January 6th happened. Your original comment wasn't logical, it was tough person on the internet noise.
mardifoufs 4y ago
So any country without civil forfeiture is just following libertarian talking points? You realize america is the exception, and not allowing the police to randomly seize property isn't libertarian? It's complete partisan brain rot to defend FBI asset seizure just to own the imaginary libertarians, or because the FBI is on "your side" now. Abolishing the institution that is so eagerly participating in civil forfeiture would be a pretty moderate position outside the US.

cptskippy 4y ago

> They are routinely overstepping the bounds of civil behavior... What does that even mean? Your argument starts with a statement everyone agrees with, you assert something that's a stretch to believe at best. Then you just start making things up. Finally you assert that absurd action needs to be taken. Why is it possible to burn the FBI to the ground but not reform civil forfeiture? You need to ask yourself who would benefit from dismantling the FBI, because the FBI does a lot more than civil forfeiture. The same goes for the Post Office and IRS. Someone else has a lot more to gain from dismantling those institutions than you do. They're just riling you up to carry out their agenda.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]