Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Car Seizures and Drug Arrests

2Thick said:
What kind of anti-Constitutional policy is that?

Why would this type of policy be allowed?

This is definitely contrary to an American's right against unlawful search and seizure.
Click to expand...

instrument of a crime 2Thick ol buddy...

should you get your gun back after shooting someone???

should you get your knife back after stabbing someone???

if you beat a drug rap should you get your drugs back???

no constitutional policy you say???

you liberals have no problem with land being
grabbed if some endangered slug happens
to live on it...

or some sierra club assholes think that only
they and their elitist buddies belong there

irs does it all the time for nonpayment of taxes...

should you get your computer back after being convicted
of trafficking in kiddie porn???
 
Re: Re: Car Seizures and Drug Arrests

bwood8168 said:


instrument of a crime 2Thick ol buddy...

should you get your gun back after shooting someone???

should you get your knife back after stabbing someone???

if you beat a drug rap should you get your drugs back???

no constitutional policy you say???

you liberals have no problem with land being
grabbed if some endangered slug happens
to live on it...

or some sierra club assholes think that only
they and their elitist buddies belong there

irs does it all the time for nonpayment of taxes...

should you get your computer back after being convicted
of trafficking in kiddie porn???
Click to expand...

Try coming up a with a logical reply.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Car Seizures and Drug Arrests

bwood8168 said:



analogy n. - example of something similar.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It is only party to a crime of the crime could not be committed without it (like a gun, knife or computer).

And as you know, you do not need a car to buy weed. Therefore, it is not a party to a crime.

try to learn a little something about law before replying.
 
You guys saw COPS too, huh? Hehe, did you see the look on that last kid's face when he got busted? As for the seizure of property, don't do the crime if you can't do the time. If marijuana were legalized, we wouldn't have all these bullshit arrests being made, though.
 
Kalashnikov said:
As for the seizure of property, don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
Click to expand...

Doing your time now means having your property turned over to the government? That is absurd.

What about the rest of the family that may use that car or whatever. Say a womens husband got busted trying to pick up a prostitute in his wifes car. Gov.org could take that car and this women would have to fight for her right to get that car back although she had nothing to do with the actual crime. You think thats fair?

The government steals more property each year than you could imagine. Hell, they steal more property than our usual street criminals and bank robbers.
 
Civil asset forfeiture in conjunction with criminal prosecution is just another way for the state revenue machine to operate.

These are some of the worst laws on the books.
 
Why do you say they are some of the worst laws on the books?

As for seizure, you cannot just take someones property. You must file for seizure.

If you are using your house for a grow operation, then yes, it can be seized and auctioned off.

If you are driving a car and have crack in it (enough to be considered a dealer) then yes we can seize the car. We can seize cash, but only if it is being directly used to finance the illegal activity.

Some things to remember:

1. Seized property needs to be free of a lien or at least not have a lot of money owed on it. Since the cops would have to pay off the lien. Most likely why the enron groups property was not seized. They did however seize their assets (bank accounts, etc)

2. If you are using property in the furtherence of a crime, then you can and will be deprived of it.

3. As for unreasonable searches and seizures, that argument doesn't fly.

If I pull you over, and

a) legally arrest you for some crime or outstanding warrant, I can search your car for the fruits of the crime. Also, since you are being arrested an inventory search will be done if the vehicle is impounded. Either way, I will be doing a search of your person and your vehicle, it is called a search incident to arrest. Now, the conditions on this search for example falls under the wingspan rule. (only that which you could reach with outstretched arms) So, unless I find crack or a weapon in the car I cannot just search the trunk and other areas outside the car. Now, If I really suspect that something is wrong here, I can always get a search warrant and go that route.

The seizure rules are very specific in when and why I can seize your property. The supreme court weighed in on this years ago and put a stop to the types of seizures, that most remember. So now, it is very difficult to seize property.

I am sure some of you will not aggree with me, but I was out there doing this, and it is not unconstitutional as long as you abide by the fourth amendment.
 
all true chesty...

what 2Thick seems to be questioning is the
constitutionality of these seizures...

he reasons that you do not need a car to buy weed...

true. however you need a car to transport weed, large
quantities anyway...

he ignores that smaller amounts of hard drugs are felonies
as well...

so if a person is driving around with felony weight on them,
they are using the automobile to transport a controlled substance...

the automobile is being used in the furtherance of a felony
and is therefore an instrument of a crime...

i gave him several analogies and all he can do is be insulting...

i'm shattered...:(
 
Some of you on this thread are fucking ridiculous....but you have the right to your opinions.....what is one major reason this Drug War against the people rages on? Becuase of these seizure laws....


War against the People you ask? Well according to some on this board, the DEA or some other agency has put up signs in several cities saying "IF You Think It's Dry Now, Wait Until Christmas" ...
 
hey frac...

elaborate more please...

i dont flame so i want to know
more of your reasoning...

i havent advocated seizure laws
in this thread...

i have just attempted to answer
2thick's original question...

you and i are usually close on our posted
views...

do we differ on this one???:D
 
Everything we do is a choice. If creating a better you through fitness involves the use of steroids, then I do it. But if I do something that is also illegal, but has the potential of doing harm to someone else, then I don't. It is a moral decision.

It is not the seizure laws that keep drug war going. It is the fact that you can't win a war that no one wants won. It is our civilian version of Vietnam.
 
I'm not sure Bwood....I disagree with seizure laws because I disagree with the drug war altogther....all the drug war has done in my opinion is:

-Create a massive criminal enterprise, the results of which spread to other areas of crime

-Eliminate further civil liberties

-Cause a strain on the prison system resultingin rapists and murders getting out early to make room for the ever-dangerous low level pot smuggler...who may have gone in just a lowly pot smuggler, but spending 5 years among the nastier criminals and he comes out to become far worse

-Gives naturally rebellious teenagers the perfect thing they need, all that D.A.R.E. accomplished for me was to make me curious about drugs and laugh at how stupid DARE was.....the more drugs are discouraged by the authorities the more attractive they become to teenagers

there are a ton more but this is enough for now
 
chesty said:
Why do you say they are some of the worst laws on the books?


If you are using your house for a grow operation, then yes, it can be seized and auctioned off.
Click to expand...

This is why they are the worst laws on the books. Why would the government need to auction of this house. Why not just take out the drugs and go about your business? It is very likely that the rest of the family could need that house to live in. So now the government fucks are just putting more people out on the streets. All these laws due is provide more revenue for the government without solving a damn thing.

The war on drugs/people is ridiculous. Just another way to make the american sheep think the government is doing something worthwhile. Nothing more than feel good propaganda and bullshit legislation.
 
But as I said, it requires a lot more to seize a house than just saying it is now mine. As you cited if say the wife and kids are living there and have no complicity in the operation, then the gov't will most likely not seize the house, unless a she can't afford it, b)she is not on the title (most banks will rep if owner violates the law, they do this by calling the loan due now.) For example, the VA specifically states this on VA loans. So, if she can afford to buy the house she can keep it.

On the other hand, why not auction off the property and use the proceeds to help the police to buy better equipment, hire more people, etc.

You are all in a catch 22. You want the po po to save your ass when it is getting beat down, but you also hate 'em. Can't have it both ways.
 
chesty said:
But as I said, it requires a lot more to seize a house than just saying it is now mine. As you cited if say the wife and kids are living there and have no complicity in the operation, then the gov't will most likely not seize the house, unless a she can't afford it, b)she is not on the title (most banks will rep if owner violates the law, they do this by calling the loan due now.) For example, the VA specifically states this on VA loans. So, if she can afford to buy the house she can keep it.

On the other hand, why not auction off the property and use the proceeds to help the police to buy better equipment, hire more people, etc.

You are all in a catch 22. You want the po po to save your ass when it is getting beat down, but you also hate 'em. Can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...

Well that sure was not the case when the supreme court ruled that a women had no right to her car when her husband was busted for picking up a prostiture. The lady had nothing to do with it yet her car was taken. Thats bullshit!

No we dont want it both ways. I want the police out there solving and preventing real crimes like murders, rapes, child molestation. We all know that cops are nothing more than a revenue souce. Otherwise, they would not be worried about pulling people over for speeding, busting people with drugs, or sitting around at roadblocks looking for people who have been drinking. That is a waste of resources. If the cops would learn to use their resources effectively than they wouldn't need to auction of peoples property in order to hire more people.
 
I was a cop, and we don't go around pulling people over for revenue of busting people for drugs for revenue. We solve real crime, get the crap beat out of us and so on. There had to be more to the case than a John picking up a hooker in a car. You cannot seize a car for that. Like I said, the rules are very specific. He had to have done something else and remember, most states are community property, so she has no more ownership in the car than he does.
 
chesty said:
I was a cop, and we don't go around pulling people over for revenue of busting people for drugs for revenue. We solve real crime, get the crap beat out of us and so on. There had to be more to the case than a John picking up a hooker in a car. You cannot seize a car for that. Like I said, the rules are very specific. He had to have done something else and remember, most states are community property, so she has no more ownership in the car than he does.
Click to expand...

You are correct in that not all cops are out pulling people over and busting them for drugs, but I would wager that the majority are doing that. I am also not just talking about cops here though. We have other government agencies out there looking for people doing bullshit crimes. They are doing nothing but getting revenue for gov.org. Like I said before......feel good propaganda and bullshit legislation.

That ownership bullshit is ridiculous. They would not even compensate for her half interest in the property.

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

-Fifth Amendment
Click to expand...

Doesn't get much clearer than that.
 
chesty said:
There had to be more to the case than a John picking up a hooker in a car. You cannot seize a car for that. Like I said, the rules are very specific. He had to have done something else and remember, most states are community property, so she has no more ownership in the car than he does.
Click to expand...

That is wrong. I saw a COPS episode where they seized cars when the John was arrested.
 
What you are seeing is the car being impounded. That is towed to the property lot of the police dept. Where the owner can pick it up when they get out of jail. It is also where they are towed so that when the warrant is issued a proper search can be done.

Yes that is what it says, due process. That is, if you go to court and win you get your property back, if you go to court and lose you lose your property. Remember, if convicted of a felony your civil rights are revoked. You no longer have the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

She doesn't have to be compensated for her "half" Like I said there is more to this crime than picking up a hooker.

2thick, now you know that some cops have been very helpful to you ;)

We all play a game called life. Remember it ain't a crime if you don't get caught!
 
The problem is she had nothing to do with the crime. It was a family car and she at least deserves compensation for her half. It was a bullshit ruling by that worthless kangaroo court.

There was not more to the crime than her husband picking up a hooker amd engaging in a sexual act. I have read the entire decision and it was complete bullshit.

It is funny how so many people on this site talk about the government overstepping their bounds, but in most cases they are just complete hypocrites. How could anyone agree with punishing an INNOCENT person because her husband fucked up and got busted for picking up a hooker (uneffective use of police resources)?
 
So, by the same logic then, if my wife were to take my rifle and go cap someone in the head and they seize rifle, I should either get the rifle back or be paid for it so they can keep it as evidence?

Post the link to the ruling you keep referring to. I want to read the case for myself.
 
sorry, chesty, but these cars WERE being siezed. the police officers made that perfectly clear, they said if you want your car back you are going to have to buy it back from us. they were being real dicks about it too.

i dont know what state you live in so the laws may be different for you but it is quite common in many states for people to have cars/houses/possesions/cash siezed over minute amounts drugs. the people being set up for a sting on the cops show all had there cars siezed over, at the most, 40 dollars worth of weed. my last lawyer had a client whose 800,000 dollar yacht was siezed when the coast gaurd boarded his boat and found a dime bag. he eventually got his boat back after extensive legal fees. stuff like this happens all the time.


frackal, the dea signs you are refering to is a urban legend.

check out this link for more info. http://www.snopes.com/crime/cops/dea.htm
 
chesty said:
So, by the same logic then, if my wife were to take my rifle and go cap someone in the head and they seize rifle, I should either get the rifle back or be paid for it so they can keep it as evidence?

Post the link to the ruling you keep referring to. I want to read the case for myself.
Click to expand...

so you are comparing a murder weapong to a car used to pick up a prostitute or buy some pot? riiiigght i think logic just went out the window.
 
chesty said:
So, by the same logic then, if my wife were to take my rifle and go cap someone in the head and they seize rifle, I should either get the rifle back or be paid for it so they can keep it as evidence?

Post the link to the ruling you keep referring to. I want to read the case for myself.
Click to expand...

Actually, yes I think you should get your rifle back or be compensated for it if they decided to keep it for evidence.


http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-8729.ZO.html
 
In any state any amount of a narcotic, cocaine, etc is a felony crime of possession. What is more of a deterrent, getting your hand slapped or losing your house?
 
chesty said:
In any state any amount of a narcotic, cocaine, etc is a felony crime of possession. What is more of a deterrent, getting your hand slapped or losing your house?
Click to expand...

The problem is that people do not know about the law.

That is what is so wrong with it.

if they told everyone then it would be a deterrent. By keeping a secret until the person is arrested is unconstitutional.
 
Rush, are you sure bro? Golfer18 himself said he saw them....if they are an urban myth however than good, it just seemed so "US VS YOU THE PEOPLE" to me..
 
HumorMe said:
I found the solution to all of this...............











Don't break the fucking law, assholes!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Gimme a fuckin break Do you exceed the speed limit? roll through stop signs? Cut corners on taxes?

Or do some laws not apply to you? Get off your soapbox.
 
Interesting, the law of michigan does grant the co owner compensation for their half of the vehicle, but as the judge said, they paid only 600 dollars for the 11 year old pontiac and that after fees and such were deducted there would be nothing left to give to her.

Plus, the fourteenth nor the fifth amendments were violated. And they were able to show an extremely long established precedence for such cases dating back to the early 1800's. The 5th amendment was put in to protect against the gov't seizing your property and using it without compensation or due process to you to prevent the military (as one example) from seizing your house and using it for themselves leaving you out in the cold. However, they may request use of it and or use it so long as they allow you to remain there as well and compensate you for its use.
 
Law enforcement is just another arm of the state revenue machine. If you think it is anything else you are delusional.
 
chesty said:
Interesting, the law of michigan does grant the co owner compensation for their half of the vehicle, but as the judge said, they paid only 600 dollars for the 11 year old pontiac and that after fees and such were deducted there would be nothing left to give to her.

Plus, the fourteenth nor the fifth amendments were violated. And they were able to show an extremely long established precedence for such cases dating back to the early 1800's. The 5th amendment was put in to protect against the gov't seizing your property and using it without compensation or due process to you to prevent the military (as one example) from seizing your house and using it for themselves leaving you out in the cold. However, they may request use of it and or use it so long as they allow you to remain there as well and compensate you for its use.
Click to expand...

Like I said it was a bullshit ruling that will only allow for more innocent people to have their property taken by gov.org. It does not matter how much the car was worth. That was just a nice excuse to say that the government owns your ass and they will do as they please with your property.

The lady should have never been in court in the first place.
 
Frackal said:
Rush, are you sure bro? Golfer18 himself said he saw them....if they are an urban myth however than good, it just seemed so "US VS YOU THE PEOPLE" to me..
Click to expand...

100% positive. did you go to that link i provided? it makes sense that it is a lie, there would be no point in letting dealers know that there is going to be an increase in busts. this rumor has been floating around for a long time.

i post on www.overgrow.com and this subject has been talked about a lot over there.

a lot of people say they have seen the signs yet they can never prove it.
 
Well, have you heard of ignorance is no excuse? They do publish every single law in this country. Problem is most of us don't care, and most of the laws will not affect us directly. With that said, there are too many damned laws passed every year to keep up with them. Hell, there is probably one for breathing in when you should have breathed out.
 
I don't think it is a bullshit ruling. We may not like it, but it probably would have cost more tax dollars to pay her the 50 bucks she would have gotten then the car was worth.

Look at it this way, she got her day in court more than once and apparently didn't really need the money as it went all the way to the US Supreme Court. Now, did she really need the 50 dollars? And think of all your tax dollars spent to answer her appeals. For godsake man, it wasn't like it was a Testarosa or something like that.
 
chesty said:
I don't think it is a bullshit ruling. We may not like it, but it probably would have cost more tax dollars to pay her the 50 bucks she would have gotten then the car was worth.

Look at it this way, she got her day in court more than once and apparently didn't really need the money as it went all the way to the US Supreme Court. Now, did she really need the 50 dollars? And think of all your tax dollars spent to answer her appeals. For godsake man, it wasn't like it was a Testarosa or something like that.
Click to expand...

The point has nothing to do with how much money the lady would have received. The ruling only endorses the government to steal property form innocent people who had zero to do with the crime at hand.

I think I have read that the government collects close to 5 billion in seized property yet they continue to take more and more money from us citizens. They are nothing more than a bunch of scumbags who are worse than most criminals in this country.

That worthless kangaroo court we call the Supreme Court needs overhauled as soon as possible. The panel of judges is a disgrace to this country. How hard is it to READ the constitution? We dont need the damn thing interpreted! Just read it for gods sake.
 
2THICK
SPEAKING FROM SOMEONE WHO HAD HIS BIKE AND CAR CONFISACATED, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. IT IS A FUCKED UP POLICY BUT IT JUST GOES TO SHOW YOU THAT THE LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMUNITY BASICALLY DOES WHATEVER THE FUCK THEY WANT TO.

I GOT BOTH MY BIKE AND MY CAR BACK BUT ONLY B/C THEY FUCKED UP ON PAPERWORK AND PROCEDURES THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO FOLLOW. WHEN THEY LEARNED THAT I WOULD BE GETTING MY SHIT BACK, THEY TRIED TO FILL OUT ALL THE PAPERWORK AND BACK DATE IT THEN GIVE IT TO THE PROPER PEOPLE. FUCKING LIARS!!!



KAYNE
 
The point is the car was used to commit a crime. Whether or not we agree with it.

I agree the Constitution does not need to be interpreted, but understood.

Without tht kangaroo court, this country would be in worse shape than it is

And as for generalizing about cops, you are wrong. 99 percent of us are doing the job because we like to help people, but there is the 1% that are rotten. Just because you got fucked does not mean we are all out to get you.

I stopped the other day to check on an officer whose car was on the side of the road with no cop in sight. I called dispatch, told her I would wait for another unit that was on its way to get there. Then this city car pulls up and couple of doughnut eaters get out wearing their tactical t-shirts (I know more about tactics than these guys will ever know) any way, as I walk up to the fatter one, he is like "CAN I HELP YOU?" I said, yes, this squad car was here with no cop around I was checking to make sure the officer was okay. He snapped backed "ITS MY CAR" and was all pissed off and shit that I was there. I told him he should call the dispatcher and tell her he is okay as numerous people have called on it and a marked unit was on the way.

He just growled at me and walked away. The guy he was with at least thanked me. As I was leaving the dumbshit was putting gas in his car (he ran out) instead of telling the dispatcher he just left the car to go get gas. In the meantime several people plus the station started getting concerned for this asshole of the month.

So, you see even cops get dissed by the 1%

Read the book or watch the movie about Serpico, it will tell you a lot.
 
chesty said:
The point is the car was used to commit a crime. Whether or not we agree with it.



Without tht kangaroo court, this country would be in worse shape than it is
Click to expand...

So what if it was used to commit a crime. The police do not need the car for anything other than getting some free money by auctioning off stolen propety. Punish the person who committed the crime not his innocent wife who now has no transportation.

I certainly agree we need the Supreme Court. The problme lies with the idiots who are appointed to the court.
 
Frackal said:
I'm not sure Bwood....I disagree with seizure laws because I disagree with the drug war altogther....all the drug war has done in my opinion is:

-Create a massive criminal enterprise, the results of which spread to other areas of crime

-Eliminate further civil liberties

-Cause a strain on the prison system resultingin rapists and murders getting out early to make room for the ever-dangerous low level pot smuggler...who may have gone in just a lowly pot smuggler, but spending 5 years among the nastier criminals and he comes out to become far worse

-Gives naturally rebellious teenagers the perfect thing they need, all that D.A.R.E. accomplished for me was to make me curious about drugs and laugh at how stupid DARE was.....the more drugs are discouraged by the authorities the more attractive they become to teenagers

there are a ton more but this is enough for now
Click to expand...

agree with ya again frac on the whole drug war...

let me tell ya a seizure story though...

we had this one piece of crap slingin to the local young punks....

he was a real piece of shit...out on parole after trying to off an
undercover officer and having numerous delivery charges against
him...served about two years on a 13 year sentence(that should make 2thick happy)...

anyway he get out and first thing starts selling...sells a dtf agent
an eightball...

parole agent wants to wait until he does something REALLY bad
before trying to revoke him though...:mad:

anyway, he's got this piece of shit attorney who thinks its so
clever to have shithead license his vehicle in his mama's name...

of course, momma's a piece of shit too...and has no problems
with this...house was also in her name...

so...we kept logs of vehicles asshole was driving...

lots of logs...

shithead finally gets popped...

10 eightballs found in the crack of his ass later, and the pussy parole officer decides to push for revocation...:mad:

he's all cocky, talking that he'll be back in 6 months...

judge loved that by the way...

well, the logs go to court with us...

thanks for the vehicles asshole...he had delivered out of both...:FRlol:

almost got the house, but he sold in the street, not on his
curtilage...

maybe next time...:D
 
2Thick said:
The problem is that people do not know about the law.

That is what is so wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Just want to butt in here for a moment then I will vanish from this thread.

If someone doesn't know that possesion or use of drugs is against the law, then he is fucking stupid and deserves to be in jail.

That is all.

-Warik
 
Warik said:


Just want to butt in here for a moment then I will vanish from this thread.

If someone doesn't know that possesion or use of drugs is against the law, then he is fucking stupid and deserves to be in jail.

That is all.

-Warik
Click to expand...

Try to understand what I am talking about before vanishing again.

I was talking about the law that states that the government will STEAL your car for 20$ worth of tabacco...oops, I mean another plant leaf.
 
Warik said:


Just want to butt in here for a moment then I will vanish from this thread.

If someone doesn't know that possesion or use of drugs is against the law, then he is fucking stupid and deserves to be in jail.

That is all.

-Warik
Click to expand...

Well that makes a lot of sense coming from the moderater of an A.S. board. Silly goose Warik.
 
2Thick said:


Try to understand what I am talking about before vanishing again.

I was talking about the law that states that the government will STEAL your car for 20$ worth of tabacco...oops, I mean another plant leaf.
Click to expand...

Oh I know what you are talking about, and I agree that the government steal... err I mean "seizing" your car for marijuana possession is ridiculous.

You, however, said that the "problem" is that people don't know the law, when chesty was saying that any amount = felony possession.

Hence my comment: if you don't know that using/possessing drugs is illegal, you are stupid.

(side note: The stupidity seems to be worse of a crime than the possession IMO. :))

-Warik
 
Well,
it appears that we do not like the laws of the land. Then go elect a statesman that will get the laws changed to suit your fantasy's. The laws state that you lose the property if it is used in a crime. Doesn't matter who owned it. End of story. There is compensation if it is monetarily feasible.

But then why have your civil rights revoked once convicted of a felony? You could use them someday right? The other person didn't need them though? Hmmmm?
 
chesty said:
Well,
it appears that we do not like the laws of the land. Then go elect a statesman that will get the laws changed to suit your fantasy's. The laws state that you lose the property if it is used in a crime. Doesn't matter who owned it. End of story. There is compensation if it is monetarily feasible.

But then why have your civil rights revoked once convicted of a felony? You could use them someday right? The other person didn't need them though? Hmmmm?
Click to expand...

damnit chest that makes NO sense. we are talking about victimless crimes. posession cases, etc.

WHO THE FUCK IS THE 'OTHER PERSON'?
 
bwood8168 said:


agree with ya again frac on the whole drug war...

let me tell ya a seizure story though...

we had this one piece of crap slingin to the local young punks....

he was a real piece of shit...out on parole after trying to off an
undercover officer and having numerous delivery charges against
him...served about two years on a 13 year sentence(that should make 2thick happy)...

anyway he get out and first thing starts selling...sells a dtf agent
an eightball...

parole agent wants to wait until he does something REALLY bad
before trying to revoke him though...:mad:

anyway, he's got this piece of shit attorney who thinks its so
clever to have shithead license his vehicle in his mama's name...

of course, momma's a piece of shit too...and has no problems
with this...house was also in her name...

so...we kept logs of vehicles asshole was driving...

lots of logs...

shithead finally gets popped...

10 eightballs found in the crack of his ass later, and the pussy parole officer decides to push for revocation...:mad:

he's all cocky, talking that he'll be back in 6 months...

judge loved that by the way...

well, the logs go to court with us...

thanks for the vehicles asshole...he had delivered out of both...:FRlol:

almost got the house, but he sold in the street, not on his
curtilage...

maybe next time...:D
Click to expand...

What does a car have to do with selling drugs? And really, what's so bad about a little cocaine anyway?
 
bwood8168 said:




he was selling to children...
Click to expand...

I hear you. I'm just being the devil's advocate. The big prob with asset forfeiture is that it's a slippery slope.

Cars from drug dealers today is houses from "suspected terrorists" tomorrow. And who is a suspected terrorist? Could be anybody. Remember Allen Iverson's gun epsiode? One of the things he was charged with was "making terroristic threats".

I'm against leaving discretion to the government.
 
2Thick said:


LOL... not me.

The point I am trying to make is that the racist Montreal police officers make things worse 99% of the time (especially with those 100 pound women who are constantly trying to prove their worth).
Click to expand...

well for once I will agree. The Montreal Police is probably the worst in Quebec. Most of them are in bad shape, big attitude, low minded too. They hire people just to look politically correct. So if you're black, women, chinese, Native, no matter what you got inside you get the job. 2 years ago when I applied in many jobs (including my actual) I was accepted everywhere except with the Montreal Police........ go figure....
 
Because the fucking laws are written that way you dufess. If you don't want the uninvolved party to suffer, then rewrite the freakin law! Until then, the laws state that this type of seizure is allowed and has been upheld by the supreme court. If you do not like, then go get the laws changed!
 
chesty said:
Because the fucking laws are written that way you dufess. If you don't want the uninvolved party to suffer, then rewrite the freakin law! Until then, the laws state that this type of seizure is allowed and has been upheld by the supreme court. If you do not like, then go get the laws changed!
Click to expand...

OINK! You sound like a good cop.
 
2Thick said:
What kind of anti-Constitutional policy is that?

Why would this type of policy be allowed?

This is definitely contrary to an American's right against unlawful search and seizure.
Click to expand...

I wonder if they teach the dogs to sit no matter if there are drugs or not just to search your vehicle. Remember when those Islamic students were stopped in Florida a few months back and they said their dogs alerted for explosives, yet they never found any explosives. Cops will say anything to search your vehicle. I once had my vehicle searched and the cop said "for my protection, I'm going to have to search your vehicle." Your in a no win situation, if you say no your acting suspicious, if you say yes they will search and find whatever you have. Luckily I didn't have anything, but you really have no rights when you're in your vehicle.
 
Property can be seized without the owner ever being convicted of a crime. The laws are in existance as a way to harm drug traffickers without having to go through the trouble of actually convicting them. Their property is essentially found "guily" by default and it is up to the defendant to PROVE that his property is "innocent".

That is how it works and can get plenty of references if anyone needs to see them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
what do you guys like for erections?
Replies
7
Views
313
Arabian
Arabian
UGL OZ
Platinum Supplier [UGL OZ] Back In Stock: Mast E, Mast P, Rip Blend
Replies
7
Views
1K
abolone
abolone
4
FAKE Pfizer Genotropin Napsgear
Replies
16
Views
2K
jasonhill800
jasonhill800
~Vision~
PSL Article 📜🧪🥼NEW Proviron LAB TEST RESULTS🥼🧪📜 7-12-2024 By PSL
Replies
22
Views
3K
~Vision~
~Vision~
Liquid Gold Labs
  • Sticky
Silver Supplier 💎 Liquid Gold Labs Updates + Announcements 💎
Replies
9
Views
2K
pigsy
pigsy
Top Bottom