5 ms·

FBI Seizes Thousands of Artifacts from 91-Year-Old Man's Home

• erikig 13y ago
  TLDR; "The aim of the investigation is to determine what each artifact is, where it came from and how Miller obtained it, Jones said, to determine whether some of the items might be illegal to possess privately." Not sure whether this is justified or just another overreach by the FBI.
  • danjayh 13y ago
    It almost sounds to me like they're seizing a collection that was probably bought and paid for by this man. If that's the case, and the only thing illegal he's done is break some 'you can't have that' laws, I'd say this is almost outright theft. I can understand restricting private ownership of items that could cause massive physical harm to others (nerve gas, pathogens, etc.), but restricting ownership of something because it's a 'cultural treasure'? Sounds awfully authoritarian to me. Hopefully there's more to this and the article simply left it out.
    • sillysaurus3 13y ago
      If it's stolen property, it's a tough situation. What should happen if someone steals the art and sells it through a fencer? Should that customer get to keep it? If not, should it be taken from that customer and returned to its owner? It seems unlikely that's what's happening here, though. But it's an interesting question. I don't know how law enforcement usually handles that situation.
    • sentenza 13y ago
      So you're not interested in history and thus it is OK to destroy it? Allowing the circulation of illegally obtained cultural artifacts allows the market of grave-robbers, looters and "amateur archeologists" to prosper. Whenever one of these assholes removes something from its place to sell it, we lose all the contextual information surrounding the piece, which is often much more valuable than the artifact itself. Historical sites that were undisturbed for thousands of years are plundered right now in Syria, because western collectors pay handsomely to increase their stash.