Skip to comments.Abusive civil asset-forfeiture laws: IRS seizure of property without due process should cease
Posted on 04/15/2014 5:19:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Do you think the Internal Revenue Service and other government agencies should have the right to seize your assets, including your bank accounts, when you have not been convicted of wrongdoing? The fact is, the IRS and other government agencies do this all of the time, and often without even a formal accusation of wrongdoing.
Anyone who is awake knows that the IRS has been politicized and thus critics of the administration live in fear that their property will be taken for the mere act of speaking out against the government.
The American Founding Fathers well understood that if the government was given too much power, it would almost certainly abuse it. Unfortunately, the elaborate system of checks and balances they devised has been steadily eroded by weak-kneed and intellectually bankrupt judges, members of Congress and presidents over the past two centuries, and thus, the United States increasingly resembles an authoritarian state rather than a republic that protects individual liberties.
The government has always been able to seize private property that was used to perpetrate a crime or produced by a crime. Under the Constitution, every American has the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Thus, in criminal cases, the government has to convince a judge and jury beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed. Under civil asset-forfeiture laws, no such proof is required and, as a result, many innocent people have had their property taken by agents of the federal government.
As people become increasingly aware of the abuses, individual citizens and organizations formed to protect individual liberty are fighting back and beginning to win some cases. There was the widely publicized case of Terry Dehko and his daughter, who had owned a supermarket in Fraser, Mich., since 1978.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Most Federal agencies need to be disarmed, as they have NO law enforcement authority, and certainly no NEED for SWAT!
One more reason not to leave resources unsecured in a “bank”.
0bama is doing what he promised. He said he wanted a civilian national security force, just as well funded as the military. This is his version. His army is not to protect the citizens, rather to protect the new, transformed government. It is racist to object.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
The Founders never thought free people would stand for taxing their income, much less stand for the confiscation of their property by force from the government.
If it gets to the point at the Bundy ranch where the shooting starts, it could be the last chance for this nation to survive as one of a free people or the point at which the imperial federal government has no more obstacles.
20 years ago Waco was a wake up call for the federal police state as it was somewhat divided. Now with the advent of “homeland security” and a few billion rounds of ammo, they are a domestic occupying federal army IMO and if not already will soon be impossible to defy with their drones, tanks, spy satellites and the like at the ready. As true storm troopers everywhere, they are happy to crush anything in their path to complete state control.
Get in line behind the innocent people who have assets seized by the DEA, etc. in the name of the failed War on (Some) Drugs.
Right? That was the top of the slippery slope, and nobody cared, cuz, you know, it was those darn druggies.