Posted on 03/21/2015 9:53:16 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Civil asset forfeiture tempts all police and too few resist. It should never have been allowed. Just another evil result of the War On Drugs .
Oh Hell Yeah!
The practice of “inventory search” (see post#20) seems OK and constitutional but it should not be unreasonably difficult for an arrestee who is let go or gets bail to get his stuff back (except if he’ charged, maybe not stuff that may be criminal evidence).
I’m not sure if that’s what “Civil Asset Forfeiture” is or not.
Not a peep about a similar law here in Texas. We have a LONG WAY TO GO to catch up to more conservative states.
Note also that Ms. Martinez is Hispanic and so is 45% of her state - obviously MANY Hispanics will vote Republican, providing they learn the language and culture of this country.
As more and more states decriminalize and legalize marijuana, there will be less of that practice. Of course the Federal government could solve that one all at once. There will be less agreement on decriminalizing other drugs.
bttt
It still amazes me that no one is talking about my dark horse candidate for 2016, the freakin awesome Susana Martinez.
Drug dealers love this more. This will mean millions more in cash and assets they get to keep.
Susana Martinez has to express some interest.
Colorado, Minnesota, New York and Utah have primaries/caucuses after Iowa and New Hampshire, but before really big money is needed. Is she working those states? Asking to show up at the various conservative forums?
It’s definitely too late for early pub in Iowa and New Hampshire. What does she do to raise her profile?
New Mexico has some funny Rats when it comes to guns and property rights. They act like conservatives. I wish all of them were like that.
Does this mean they can`t take Hillary`s server?
I don’t see how legal pot has that much effect on these seizures, Drugs are the excuse now but even if all drugs were legal, they’d find another, human trafficking, gun running, or gasp “untaxed loosies.
I think Governor Martinez is hoping for a VP slot.
Republicans on the wrong side once again:
“The Comprehensive Crime Control Act — was passed by Congress in 1984 after being co-sponsored by prominent conservative senators at the time, such as Strom Thurmond and Orrin Hatch. Also, it should not be overlooked that it was signed into law by then-President Ronald Reagan.”
"You're just trying to encourage drug use & addict our children! Asset forfeiture plays an essential role in keeping our nation free from drugs, & here you are spreading this poison, blah, blah, blah...".
This happens with joint butts on expensive boats, firearms in domestic cases, etc...
The issue is pre-crime asset forfeiture.
If “civil asset forfeiture” allows a search or seizure without probably cause, then it is illegal and unconstitutional. 4th Amendment “unreasonableness” and “probable cause” are the key elements without which the search or seizure is unconstitutional.
If “civil asset forfeiture” is an unconstitutional law, it simply should be repealed as such or challenged in court as such. If it is an unconstitutional practice, then again a court case proving its unconstitutionality should do it. Either way, as one poster said, you don’t need a new law because you already have the Constitution. Just have to enforce it.
The longest journey begins with a single step.
Dang, just when I start thinking I can write al of ‘em off, some of ‘em get me all tingly...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.