Crime Pays for Police

The Boston Herald ^ | October 10, 2011 | Larry Salzman

[DH]

“But civil forfeiture laws treat property owners worse than criminals. Criminals must be proven guilty before their property is taken. Once the government targets a property for civil forfeiture, however, the property owner must prove his innocence.”

---

What’s wrong with this? The IRS has always done this. You are guilty until you prove yourself innocent.

It’s the way to strike fear into the souls of law abiding people so they can be controlled by the government.

[SES1066]

Having read the story and having been in the lodging business myself I am struck by not only the unfairness of this action but the possible back story.

There are a dump-truck size number of regulations about non-discrimination upon the lodging industry. This has resulted in innumerable law suits about civil rights and disability access discrimination. Given Massachusetts' reputation, I will bet that it is worse there.

If my assumption is correct, then this small, unaffiliated motel is caught between the horns of government. Just because the lodger looks like a tattooed gang member, you still have to rent to him. Yet, if you do, you have harbored an illegal activity [30/125,000 = .00024 or .024%] and thus are subject to civil forfeiture.

All hail the government that giveth and then taketh away. ... Wait, what did the government give in the first place? /sarc