Posted on 07/22/2015 8:30:14 AM PDT by MichCapCon
The Mackinac Center has joined with groups from across the political spectrum, including the ACLU of Michigan and FreedomWorks, to push back against Michigan's civil asset forfeiture laws.
Civil asset forfeiture is a practice that allows law enforcement to take possession of private property without charging the owner with a crime. Some states, as well as the federal government, have taken steps to curb this injustice in recent years, but Michigan's laws were recently rated a 'D' by FreedomWorks in a national survey of forfeiture laws.
Michigan Radio reports:
… Michigan law enforcement agencies have collected more than $250 million in forfeiture revenue since 2000, with more than $24 million in cash and assets seized in 2013.
“What we don’t know is whether those seizures and forfeitures were ever connected with a criminal conviction,” [Harris] says.
With no conviction I would like to see the state required to return property plus 11% annual interest, taken from the budget of the seizing agency.
When property is seized in Michigan, the owner has to hire a lawyer to file the appropriate motions and beat the deadlines, and then negotiate getting all the property back, or how much the owner gets back along with how much the government gets to keep by them extorting by saying, “ Take this or get nothing,” or go to the expense of a hearing, and if its lost, paying for an appeal.
You could spend as much getting the property back as it is worth. Michigan has the upper hand. Its state sactioned theft since the state is the thief.
What might be even worse is that those frequently carrying on the activity this is supposed to be stopping (mainly street drug trafficking) is so lucrative that they treat this as a TAX. They are getting milked but not punished out of existence.
We have a game of sheer ego here, folks, not a game of virtue. Nobody wants to really win the drug war. That would defund a lot of applecarts if they did.
is so lucrative => find it so lucrative
...they are getting milked...
Sometimes it involves a car which belongs to parents that is used in drug deals, and they don’t know its being used by “junior” to transport and sell drugs. The parents usually can get the car back, but they are stuck with the expense.
What is really wrong is seizure of legally possessed large amounts of cash. Say, buying a $30,000 classic car and the seller accepts only cash.
A cop can take that $30,000 you have on you for the car purchase, and the burden is on you to get it back.
Well yes, it is the non-mainstream case that creates the screaming unfair outrage.
I am pointing out the cynical irony of the mainstream case.
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.