2 ms·

There's such an odd deference to the perpetrator's chosen language here. If I go take someone's wallet, I don't get to get away with calling it a "seizure", "f

There's such an odd deference to the perpetrator's chosen language here. If I go take someone's wallet, I don't get to get away with calling it a "seizure", "forfeiture", or "revenue". It'd be called theft or robbery, and I'd go to prison. There's something infantile about how we go along with the state's fictions and pretenses rather than just calling their wording of "civil forfeiture" by its natural wording of "robbery". I think the origin of this the formation of "district attorneys", followed by only allowing them to prosecute, as well as professional police forces. This is a sharp deviation from and degradation of common law, which used to allow anyone to initiate a prosecution against anyone, and which levied the responsibility of law enforcement on everyone.

ajb 2y ago
I'm totally comfortable with calling the OP's experience robbery. I used the word "seizure" because my comment is about what the law allows, not this case in particular.
RandomBacon 2y ago
> If I go take someone's wallet, I don't get to get away with calling it a "seizure", "forfeiture", or "revenue". It'd be called theft or robbery, and I'd go to prison. I'm a Federal Employee, not a LEO. If I take someone's wallet, I can claim qualified immunity. https://ij.org/press-release/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-case-of-government-engineer-who-acted-like-a-police-officer-got-qualified-immunity-anyway/ https://ij.org/press-release/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-c...