12 ms·
What "consent" looks like for the DEA and TSA
- jacobn 2y agoAny confiscated cash needs to go into state level or even federal coffers, not to the agency or local cops that did the confiscating. That removes the immediate incentive for abuse, while retaining the tool for what it was intended for: actual criminals. (I don’t have the sources but read years ago that states that let the cops keep the cash have ridiculous levels of abusive confiscations, whereas states that have the money go to the state coffers basically don’t) (Most civil asset forfeiture is done by local cops stopping people on the highway and similar)
- gg82 2y agoJust stop trying to justify highway robbery. The criminal is the government until the person has been properly adjudicated by the courts!
- jacobn 2y agoI agree it sounds absolutely absurd - first time I heard about it I couldn’t believe it. The Wikipedia page has more on the rationale, good or bad: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United...
- meroes 2y agoI like how the first two paragraphs under the intro (History) is basically outlining how the British doing it to American colonists was a catalyst for violent revolution to come… …and then the third is describing how American courts immediately recreated the laws with these inspirations to increase their budgets.
- Nasrudith 2y agoI mean say what you will about monarchism and its many flaws, they at least had the sense to hang or behead highway robbers instead of funding them!
- thayne 2y agoOnly as long as they weren't the ones who worked for the monarch.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoMonarchs used to sponsor pirates to harass enemy nations, so long history.
- bryanrasmussen 2y agoIt was a great work program for young overactive men with low morals and high intelligence - Sir Francis Drake proved his worth to the crown. https://medium.com/luminasticity/adrenaline-culture-bed2d6406d4f https://medium.com/luminasticity/adrenaline-culture-bed2d640... (note: non-serious article has some crude language and scenarios)
- OutOfHere 2y agoIt cost the US a failure to use the metric system.
- eru 2y agoThough I heard that during Drake's circumnavigation his body count was remarkably low, especially for the age.
- bryanrasmussen 2y agoI figured Drake was the kind of guy who would stock his crew with men of his caliber, and those guys tend to make it through hell with a smile.
- greyface- 2y agoThe DoJ has established a workaround for this, and it's called Equitable Sharing. Local cop seizes assets on behalf of the DEA or other federal agency, assets are held by the federal agency rather than the local agency, the federal agency sends a kickback payment to the local agency and takes over prosecution, local agency washes its hands of the matter, enjoys the plunder, and goes off and robs more subjects. https://www.justice.gov/criminal/media/1044326/dl https://www.justice.gov/criminal/media/1044326/dl https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equitable_sharing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equitable_sharing
- umbra07 2y agowhy on earth do they get a kickback??
- rebuilder 2y agoIt creates an incentive.
- safety1st 2y agoI suspect the DoJ understood this and non ironically did not consider the problem of exploitation by corrupt cops to be a meaningful one. Because they're the DoJ. Many of them are or were basically cops themselves. It's very hard to recognize when your own people have become the bad guys. This is what we came up with checks and balances and separation of powers for, but I guess Congress is checked out on this one.
- serial_dev 2y agoIt wasn't an accident that abuse was not considered, it was intentionally designed this way, to keep local cop buddies happy and complicit. It might actually also make things worse, as local cops only get a small kickback, they need to confiscate more to get to the same levels for themselves.
- raxxorraxor 2y ago
- akira2501 2y ago> That removes the immediate incentive for abuse, It abstracts it away by one level. Without appropriate third party oversight you're going to be playing whack a mole until you have the President himself managing the operation.
- drdeca 2y agoTo solve this, I would go further: any money seized by the government, whether asset forfeiture or a fine (but not fees or taxes) must not go into any government funds, and should instead be removed from the money supply, if there isn’t a “who it should be returned to”. Well, maybe if money from fines was allowed to go directly to paying for something that directly addresses the specific type of harm that the type of crime the fine was for tends to cause, that would be ok. Like, if someone is fined for damaging the road, that money can go towards fixing roads. But nothing else.
- akira2501 2y agoJust make it a criminal case. "Transporting more than $10,000 cash in service of a crime." Now the government has to prove the details of the case beyond a reasonable doubt, rather than simple preponderance of evidence, and the accused has actual constitutional rights which dictate the process. A key piece there would afford the accused legal representation if they cannot afford it and would allow them to make constitutional arguments about the nature of the search and seizure.
- lazide 2y agoThat would require evidence and due process, which is exactly what is not desired by the gov’t here. Because money is fungible and proving some specific money came from some specific illegal activity is hard. Making someone else prove it came from a legit source before it disappears is much easier on them. Especially since drug dealers (or most other folks) are not really all that interested in the scrutiny involved in a civil trial. Civil discovery is potentially incredibly invasive, with few of the protections of a criminal case.
- 2y ago
- bagels 2y agoHow about no more asset forfeiture? Why not require due process and 4th amendment rights to be respected? If the government convicts you of the crime and proves the money is the proceeds of the crime you are convicted for, them maybe it makes sense for the government to seize the funds. Absent that, it should be taken for what it is: armed robery.
- samus 2y agoThe whole exigent circumstances exception is required to stop a crime which is highly probably to already be in progress and for which evidence could be lost to the prosecution. Especially at international airports this is highly likely to happen. The problem is that the system is set up in a way that encourages corruption.
- gus_massa 2y agoWhat about your phone? Perhaps it's a stolen one. Would you mind if the airport crew keep it in custody for a few years until you prove it was adquired legaly in a court?
- samus 2y agoIf they have reasonable suspicion that it indeed was. For example a case with a unique color pattern that is similar to a phone known to be stolen. Or if you can't unlock it. This ship has sailed quite some time ago - resist TSA or border control to unlock your phone, and they either confiscate it or turn you back. These powers are unlikely to ever be curtailed again in the name of security. But I also think that TSA and border control should rather focus on people actually violating immigration law and compromising travel security.
- bagels 2y agoThe state has proven it can't be trusted with this power.
- samus 2y ago
- jjav 2y ago> Any confiscated cash needs to go into state level or even federal coffers If I was king.. all confiscated cash must go to organizations such as ACLU and EFF (not a comprehensive list). That way it can still be done when sensible, but the more it happens the more money goes to organizations who strive to reduce abuse.
- EnigmaFlare 2y agoGiving those organizations an incentive not to reduce abuse!
- samus 2y agoThis moves the problem one level up and makes returning it more difficult since they are now muddled with other assets. A safe deposit box would be required, with the court handling the keys.
- sowbug 2y agoOr just publicly burn the cash. This retains the punitive element of seizure from actual criminals, eliminates the perverse incentives from LE treating seized funds as a revenue source, and causes actual pain to LE if/when a court determines that they owe restitution for unwarranted seizure.
- dmitrygr 2y agoAl Capone would blush in shame for his small-time scams compared to what the USGOV has been doing with Civil Asses Forfeiture
- readthenotes1 2y agoSee also, Smedley Butler
- dylan604 2y agoReminds me of the bumper sticker, "Don't steal. The government doesn't like competition"
- MarkSweep 2y agoThey meet the dictionary definition of highwaymen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highwayman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highwayman
- righthand 2y agoPttt! [] https://archive.ph/yQhw3 https://archive.ph/yQhw3
- joezydeco 2y agoIf you want to see an example of what this looks like, the Institute has a video recorded by a passenger that knew his rights. https://youtu.be/0XBzV0bDZdQ https://youtu.be/0XBzV0bDZdQ
- lifestyleguru 2y agoUnfortunately not consenting and knowing your rights doesn't help because they will search your belongings anyway. You can only delay the search which usually will not work in your favour. It happens in many developed "rule of law" countries. Something similar happened to me in Germany when traveling alone by car. When they noticed I have multiple smartphones with me they went hysterical. Luckily I had no cash on me, neither drugs of course. They were pursuing some criminals and perfectly wasted half an hour on scrolling my smartphones. Not even a single nude photo, just sunsets and travel photos with my girlfriend. Great job Kriminalpolizei from Dresden.
- koonsolo 2y agoSo did you consent on searching your phone or something else happened?
- lifestyleguru 2y agoYou say as if "consent" means anything in such situations. They told me to unlock the smartphones. The plain-clothes policeman was so aggressive and rude that I felt the devices would be confiscated otherwise, he was already holding them in his hands. I was only transiting, didn't feel like looking for a lawyer in Germany or even speaking German. They refused to identify themselves when I wanted to note it down before finally driving away. I know they were real policemen because regular uniformed police patrol joined them during the search.
- nullfrigid 2y ago[dead]
- 2y ago
- ct520 2y agoYeah... They use to pay 10% of the "bounty" seized. Not sure what the going rate is with the heat now and days. The war on drugs lol.. war on peoples rights. Warrantless GPS trackers, then it was stingrays.. quite an intersting organization. They use some .. unique software. Penlink use to publish their software updates publicly was a good read. (you can probably find it on wayback machine) Interesting software to say the least.. https://www.penlink.com/digital-intelligence-original-work-2024-01-19/live-collection/ https://www.penlink.com/digital-intelligence-original-work-2...
- LightHugger 2y agoThe free country where cops can mug you under threat of state backed violence, steal your money, and you won't get any due process, it's just gone. Ok. Extreme reform is required at this point...
- akira2501 2y agoYou get due process in the sense that you can sue for your money back and possibly even win. Due process does not imply fair process. You'll get no due process in the sense that the "authority" who took your money and deprived you of it's use will suffer no consequences due to "qualified immunity."
- TheRealPomax 2y agoI question this use of "possibly" here: can you? Not hypothetically, but can you actually win rather than the case being dragged out until you drop it or the judge sides with their government?
- akira2501 2y agoYes, you absolutely can win these cases, but you must have essentially air tight evidence as to where the money came from and that was in fact the money that was seized. You can also appeal any judgement which prevents the money from leaving custody until the appeal is complete. The chances are very small due to the way the case is structured but it is entirely possible and it has been known to occur. The main issue is it's a _civil_ case against property and the rules of a civil trial massively over benefit the government and effectively ignore fourth amendment property rights.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jimt1234 2y agoI can't believe it's been 6 years since I wrote this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17395675#17398314 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17395675#17398314 ... It basically explains local cops and "civil forfeiture", and how it ruined an innocent man's life, someone close to me. This was back in the early/mid-90s; "civil forfeiture" was brand new, and talk of "due process" - well, that just didn't exist.
- nullc 2y agoI wonder what would happen if large amounts of travelers started carrying movie prop money? Could we churn out large numbers of plaintiffs with standing against the government, without losing substantial amounts of actual money? I've seen one of these searches happen to another passenger first hand it's absurd.
- bhawks 2y agoI'm not terribly interested in testing the boundaries between prop money and counterfeit money with these personalities.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago“It’s just for if a crooked cop pulls me over” probably not going to sway the secret service.
- simoncion 2y agoThe secret service would absolutely not get involved for movie prop money. We're talking about prop money, not counterfeit money.
- crooked-v 2y agoThe typical route for movie productions now, since modern film resolution is too high to easily use fakes that fit the legal requirements, is to use stacks of blank paper of the right color with a single actual bill on top.
- desert_rue 2y agoSorry to be a downer, but I doubt prop money would look like real money on an X-ray. I’ve seen bundles of cash on a TSA X-ray and it has a distinctive look.
- kragen 2y agoon the plus side, things designed to look like bundles of cash on an x-ray, but not visually, would clearly not be 'counterfeit' and therefore much safer legally
- blendo 2y agoThe average person has the same recourse to a cop’s injustice as the average slave had to a slave catcher.
- genocidicbunny 2y agoThat's the thing, they didn't have any legal recourse, but plenty of times that just meant that the recourse would be significantly less than legal.
- cyphertruck 2y agoCriminality on the part of government will only tend to increase as legal recourse is denied, until or unless, illegal recourse becomes fashionable.
- kragen 2y agoon the contrary, illegal recourse often dramatically increases criminality on the part of government. individual illegal recourse is 'lone-wolf terrorism', organized covert illegal recourse is 'organized crime', and organized overt illegal recourse is 'insurgency' or 'civil war'. all of these situations almost invariably open doors to mass human rights abuses (criminality) on the part of the government, because it makes that criminality popular. typically, even if the insurgency wins, the increased level of government criminality persists across the regime change, often for decades or centuries
- puppycodes 2y agoHalt!! On behalf of the king thy assets are forfeit!
- robertclaus 2y agoWow, I didn't know this was a thing. Scary stuff.
- xyst 2y agoThe one encounter with the DEA agent reminds me of cheap, sleazy, sales tactics used at car dealerships. High pressure tactics to force an action. Civil forfeiture is absolutely insane. The “war on drugs” needs to end. Legalize all drugs. Dissolve the DEA. Tax all drugs. Earmark part of the sales towards drug addiction treatment and mental health.
- seoulmetro 2y agoYou mean the war on drugs needs to be surrendered. The war on drugs is great when the government and the people actually want to win the war.
- banku_brougham 2y ago“We needed to destroy the constitution in order to save it”
- seoulmetro 2y agoI don't think experiencing the benefits of a drug free society is part of the constitution.
- thelittleone 2y agoCurious, how do you define drugs in "drug free"?
- gostsamo 2y agoonly big farma companies are allow to destroy human lives by selling narcotics and should be allowed to hide the profits when brought to court. isn't it obvious?
- seoulmetro 2y agodrug-free: to be without the detriments of an illicit drug enabling society. What do you think the war on drugs means?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- menage 2y agoThis video linked in the article (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XBzV0bDZdQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XBzV0bDZdQ) makes me want to donate to Institute for Justice to maybe help stop this practice. But a bit of Googling shows that IfJ were also one of the legal forces behind the Citizens United decision, which is something I really don't want to support.
- cyphertruck 2y agoThe "Citizens United" ruling simply said that citizens who pool money to pay for political media do not lose their first amendment rights by doing so in the form of a corporation. (or other entity). In this case it was a group who funded a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton. That's it. Citizens United was a fundamentally pro-first amendment, pro-human rights ruling. I wonder if you can mount a defense of the idea that government has the right to ban people from making videos that criticize political candidates without government approval?
- Dylan16807 2y agoA PAC is not a person.
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoThe C stands for committee, which is made up of people.
- dredmorbius 2y ago<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition> A whole is not the same as its constituent parts. A person isn't an organ, or a cell, or molecules, or quarks, despite being composed of each of these.
- amanaplanacanal 2y ago
- banku_brougham 2y agoHas anybody mentioned the fourth amendment? All this talk of rationale is misguided. The plain meaning of the 4th has been undermined by our corrupted court system.
- cyphertruck 2y agoYes, and every civil asset forfeiture, every traffic stop, is a felony under 18 U.S. Code § 241. Conspiracy against rights - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 or 18 U.S. Code § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242 The problem is that the corruption has built up so much, and so many generations have grown up being "educated" by propaganda on TV like "Law & Order" that they think this is not corruption at all. But the 4th amendment is clear, they need a warrant. They never get one. And when they do, they are almost all fraudulent/invalid warrants. But since government is the only one that gets to enforce the laws, it is not a surprise that government tends to let government get away with criminal activity.
- nullfrigid 2y ago[dead]
- simoncion 2y ago> ...every traffic stop, is a felony under 18 U.S. Code § 241 ... or or 18 U.S. Code § 242... I strongly disagree with this. Traffic stops are absolutely not a felony. Properly-motivated traffic stops (think: "Stopping a driver who is operating his vehicle erratically" or "Stopping a driver whose vehicle is obviously in dangerous disrepair") are essential to maintaining the safe operation of our public roads. What should absolutely be a felony are warrantless searches conducted as part of a traffic stop, properly-motivated or not. If the cops can't get a warrant over the phone, then they should not be permitted to do the search. They're not pressed for time! It's not like you're going to be going anywhere, they've ordered you and your passengers out of the vehicle. And if you run on foot, they still have the vehicle that they can search if they get a warrant.
- 2y ago
- LanceH 2y agoI've always thought that when they ask the questions of, "did you pack this bag? and "has this been in your possession?" that it is more about drug convictions than safety.
- OutOfHere 2y agoSay what you will about Bitcoin and crypto, but it absolutely prevents this nonsense.
- guappa 2y agoIn uk you can be detained for years until you reveal your passwords.
- nullfrigid 2y ago[dead]
- dangleberry 2y agoYes, an utterly backwards law that the people should not be so willing to accept. Thank goodness for steganography.
- OutOfHere 2y agoIt is unfortunate, but it means you just to have keep it under deeper wraps. For what must be easily revealed, keep the balance low.
- Dudhbbh3343 2y agoIndeed. I regularly cross international borders with devices holding the (heavily encrypted) keys to wallets holding 7 figures, but I get nervous at the airport with $4-5 k of cash in my bag.
- dghlsakjg 2y agoAnd enables oodles of other nonsense. This nonsense can be stopped with a quick legislative change, which is not something that can be said of the deeper harms that Crypto has enabled.
- Havoc 2y agoUS borders is one of the things really dampening my enthusiasm for tourism to it.
- spiritplumber 2y agoStupid question, but what happens if I carry my cash in a container that requests access to an attorney and, if not given it, calls an attorney itself? (Let's say it's a pouch that can't be opened without destroying it, with a basic android phone built into it, that will also document its own destruction as much as it can if it comes to that). Bonus point if we give it a plaintive cute kitten voice so that the recording shows it pleading for its life. (If you want to buy one of these, I'll gladly sell you it)
- thereisnospork 2y ago>If you want to buy one of these, I'll gladly sell you it If you can work out a way to insure the loss on activation then it sounds like a solid business to me.
- bell-cot 2y agoAssume that the police have tried-and-true counter-tactics for "smart guys": https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- whacko_quacko 2y ago>they'll just tortpre you We're talking about the police, not the CIA, right? Can't imagine torture as a common response to obstinacy
- bell-cot 2y agoThe police have plenty of options for being nasty to you, short of by-the-technical-definition "torture". Data point: I tried Googling for "police misconduct"...but by the time I'd typed "police miscon", Google was already suggesting half a dozen search strings - all of which amounted to "find a nearly lawyer to help you with your police misconduct case". Sounds like a booming business, eh?
- dghlsakjg 2y agoThe police are more than happy to have you sit outside in the cold/bake on the pavement/shine excessively bright lights into your eyes/scream un-followable directives at you/deny you the use of bathroom facilities, etc... while 'conducting an investigation'. The internet is RIFE with videos of beat cops using tactics that could certainly qualify as informal psychological or physical torture, or in some cases, literal formal torture (look up Rankin County Goon Squad).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- heinrich5991 2y agohttps://archive.is/yQhw3 https://archive.is/yQhw3
- edub 2y agoI can't load the article, so this is likely off topic, but the memory came rushing back when I read this headline. I attended a wedding that got hit by a major flash flood that required a rescue operation by boat and helicopter. Thankfully no one was seriously injured. A half dozen people were swept away and rescued from trees. The rest of us got to higher floors of the building and they were concerned about us waiting out the flood because cars from the parking lot floated and rammed the first floor of the building. It was featured on an episode of I Do, Redo. They brought in busses to transport the 61 people rescued to the local high school where they had activated the Red Cross and provided us dry cloths and food. I can't say enough nice things about the Red Cross volunteers and the staff at the high school, and same with the fire department and EMS. However, when we were loaded into the busses, the police held the busses until they had a drug dog come into the busses to walk up and down the aisles, and only after that let the busses take us to the high school. While no one was seriously injured physically, people were traumatized from the flooding event and many attendees suffered from PTSD for years. It was so cruel for the police department to do what they did with everyone in the mental state that we were in. For reasons I do not understand, we were not free to leave the high school, and even the people that did not lose their cars to the flood were required to go to the high school on the busses. I can't recall how long they detained us at the high school, I'd guess 3 to 5 hours, and then they let us leave. The friend that came to pick me up (I did lose my vehicle to the flood) got to the high school not long after I did and had to wait in the parking lot for hours. We wanted to feel safe once we got to dry land after the ordeal we went through. I did not feel safe until I got home.
- amanaplanacanal 2y agoWhat the hell? Why would they do such a thing?
- archerx 2y agoTo bust some one too justify their budgets. All paths lead to money, almost always.
- 2y ago
- thelastgallon 2y agoCharlie Munger “Show me the incentives, and I’ll show you the outcome.” If there were a law that directs confiscated money to one of: pay for medical bills of the poorest, rehabilitation of those with prison history, federal disaster relief fund, gender affirming care, phone bills in prisons, etc. None of these are my actual positions, these are just examples to remove the perverse incentive to steal.
- teractiveodular 2y agoSeems to be hugged to death, here's archive.is: https://archive.is/2024.07.24-000026/https://papersplease.org/wp/2024/07/23/what-consent-really-looks-like-for-the-dea-and-tsa/ https://archive.is/2024.07.24-000026/https://papersplease.or...
- thih9 2y agoWayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20240724045202/https://papersplease.org/wp/2024/07/23/what-consent-really-looks-like-for-the-dea-and-tsa/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240724045202/https://papersple...
- tuhriel 2y agoThis somehow reminds me of the TV show "Supernatural" where Angels need 'consent' of the people to possess their body. Which basically is "they said yes", and often how they get the 'yes' contains a lot of deceit (pretending to be someone else etc) misdirection and even torture...
- EricE 2y agoSite seems to be overwhelmed - archive: https://archive.is/yQhw3 https://archive.is/yQhw3
- colinprince 2y agohttps://archive.is/yQhw3 https://archive.is/yQhw3
- mlism 2y ago[flagged]