From fail blog: Tulsa Police acquisition win?

[vvvvvvv]

...no actual proof of legal income (like a job that involved withheld taxes) for several years, then Hell yes they ought to be able to seize it...

So only a job as an employee counts as "legal income" in your eyes?

What about someone who can't hold down a job and makes a living through odd jobs?

Before you say "drug dealers don't pay taxes", many do by inflating their declared "odd job" or "consulting" (much more common) income.

 

[Super Dave]

So only a job as an employee counts as "legal income" in your eyes?

No, certainly not. There are those that own a business as well. Either way, legal income is gonna be reported, right? You either work for yourself, or you work for somebody, right? Why if you didn't report it, that would get you in trouble with a whole different group than the Tulsa PD, wouldn't it? You better believe the IRS seizes people's property.

What about someone who can't hold down a job and makes a living through odd jobs?

You know, they don't typically drive fancy Cadillac SUVs. Besides, I'm sure he has his tax records from the income he filed on all those odd jobs.


All that aside, it really comes down to getting caught dealing drugs, doesn't it? The guy working odd jobs didn't get his Caddy taken, because he's in his '79 Chevy truck fixing Mrs. Johnson's fence. The guy that got pulled over in the fancy Caddy rollin' 22s with the large amount that far exceeds personal use. How can you even compare the two? Honestly.

 

[Super Dave]

ya know if they hadn't knowingly been breaking the law, taking the risk, and not giving a sh*t about laws or regulations they wouldn't be in the situation.

Exactly!

 

[forindooruseonly]

All that aside, it really comes down to getting caught dealing drugs, doesn't it? The guy working odd jobs didn't get his Caddy taken, because he's in his '79 Chevy truck fixing Mrs. Johnson's fence. The guy that got pulled over in the fancy Caddy rollin' 22s with the large amount that far exceeds personal use. How can you even compare the two? Honestly.

So, you are advocating profiling and then seizing property based upon what someone looks like? Who determines "personal use"? My legitimate personal use may seem totally outlandish to someone else. You start throwing terms like "personal use" around and that opens a whole new can of worms. What if someone else determined how many or what kind of firearms you can own for "personal use"?

I agree with your first post - if it can be proven that certain material goods were purchased with drug money or as a result of criminal activity, by all means seize it. But only after they are convicted and the property in question shown to be a product of crime. Unfortunately, that is NOT how it works.

 

[Super Dave]

So, you are advocating profiling and then seizing property based upon what someone looks like? Who determines "personal use"? My legitimate personal use may seem totally outlandish to someone else. You start throwing terms like "personal use" around and that opens a whole new can of worms. What if someone else determined how many or what kind of firearms you can own for "personal use"?

I agree with your first post - if it can be proven that certain material goods were purchased with drug money or as a result of criminal activity, by all means seize it. But only after they are convicted and the property in question shown to be a product of crime. Unfortunately, that is NOT how it works.

I don't know what the set amount is, but I know there is one. I don't decide the amount. It has already been decided. It's what we around here call the law.

I see you posted, "Who determines "personal use"? My legitimate personal use may seem totally outlandish to someone else." In this, are you stating that you yourself use a controlled dangerous substance and/or often have it in your possession, or do you mean the hypothetical person who has x amount of drugs for his/her recreational use, which is, as I understand it, a crime just the same.

Also, If you have purchased a new firearm, then you've filled out a form 4473 (is that the right one?) Question 8; Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any controlled substance? Just saying.

Why are you defending the drug dealer? The original post wasn't a question about it being right, wrong, or otherwise. The post was about how the OP got a laugh out of it, and who is the lucky driver? Off topic for your own personal agenda, I'd say.


Oh, and I'm not advocating a person's property being seized for his appearance. I advocate a person's property being seized for SELLING DRUGS. Really. Now you're just grasping

 

[vvvvvvv]

I don't know what the set amount is, but I know there is one. I don't decide the amount. It has already been decided. It's what we around here call the law.

Actually, there is no set amount in Oklahoma. Intent to distribute a "controlled dangerous substance" only requires general, not specific, evidence such as what the substance is packaged in.

 

[Super Dave]

Actually, there is no set amount in Oklahoma. Intent to distribute a "controlled dangerous substance" only requires general, not specific, evidence such as what the substance is packaged in.

Thanks, Veg, I stand corrected.

 

[POSITIVE DISCONTENT]

ya know if they hadn't knowingly been breaking the law, taking the risk, and not giving a sh*t about laws or regulations they wouldn't be in the situation.

Sorry Z-man.... have to disagree. I am the son of some less than legal persons that wear leather with big patches on the back. I can remember 3 times where property was "appropriated" and us kids tossed in foster care until parent/parents re-established themselves..... Parental units sucked but taking our bikes and toys? Get real....

 

[forindooruseonly]

I don't know what the set amount is, but I know there is one. I don't decide the amount. It has already been decided. It's what we around here call the law.

I'm not talking about drugs, which is contraband and not property, and haven't been since I started posting in this thread. I'm talking about cash and vehicles, which are property.

I see you posted, "Who determines "personal use"? My legitimate personal use may seem totally outlandish to someone else." In this, are you stating that you yourself use a controlled dangerous substance and/or often have it in your possession, or do you mean the hypothetical person who has x amount of drugs for his/her recreational use, which is, as I understand it, a crime just the same.

Actually, if you read the posts above from the beginning of the property rights issue, you might realize we are not talking about drugs, we are talking about property - namely cash. I carry large amounts of cash on occasion going to auctions and swapmeets. So while I might have 20 grand on me in certain situations, others might not see that as legitimate personal use.

Also, If you have purchased a new firearm, then you've filled out a form 4473 (is that the right one?) Question 8; Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana, or any depressant, stimulant, or narcotic drug, or any controlled substance? Just saying.

Once again, why don't you read the posts above? Not about drugs! Its about other things that the government can use as justification for seizure of property - ie. larger amounts of cash and suspicious vehicles or appearance. So who decides how much cash is more that personal use? Cause that is essentially what the LE is deciding when it seizes property. Person X had 10,000 dollars on him, and we don't believe his story of why he has it or he refuses to tell us, so we'll just confiscate it.

Why are you defending the drug dealer? The original post wasn't a question about it being right, wrong, or otherwise. The post was about how the OP got a laugh out of it, and who is the lucky driver? Off topic for your own personal agenda, I'd say.

I've specifically said TWICE in this thread that I am not defending the drug drealers who have their property seized after conviction or assets frozen during their criminal trial.

My point in what the OP had to say is this - when LE benefits from a system that seizes property - and then is given the jurisdiction to seize property without a conviction - which they do - then it is a gross violation of property rights and shouldn't be taken as lightly as it is.

What I am concerned about is that PROPERTY can be charged with a crime, and then it is up to the law abiding citizen to convince the court to release it back to them, often at considerable effort and legal fees, all because the LE agency was suspicious of the property.

Go back and read my earlier posts and Dave70968's posts.

Oh, and I'm not advocating a person's property being seized for his appearance. I advocate a person's property being seized for SELLING DRUGS. Really. Now you're just grasping

Now, in criticism of myself, I misread your statement because it wasn't clear to me that you meant that the guy doing odd jobs wasn't caught with drugs and the guy in the Caddy was. I read it as both were doing odd jobs, and neither had been caught with drugs, but that the guy in the Caddy was clearly doing something wrong because of what he was driving. So that is my error.

 

[vvvvvvv]

I'm not talking about drugs, which is contraband and not property, and haven't been since I started posting in this thread. I'm talking about cash and vehicles, which are property.



Actually, if you read the posts above from the beginning of the property rights issue, you might realize we are not talking about drugs, we are talking about property - namely cash. I carry large amounts of cash on occasion going to auctions and swapmeets. So while I might have 20 grand on me in certain situations, others might not see that as legitimate personal use.

Drugs come up because a PWI charge is probably the most abused charge for seizing assets. Get off at 7AM, cash your paycheck, and possess two dimes? PWI, cash seized as drug money, car impounded, can't afford the legal fees to fight it, even if you could you probably can't afford the fees for the inevitable appeals process, so you plea out...