![]() |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 8814502)
...The only limit that can be imposed on you is an arbitrary one by the state - if the state sees you have cash, they can (unfortunately) decide on the spot if they want to take it away from you or not. ...
|
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 8814502)
The only limit that can be imposed on you is an arbitrary one by the state - if the state sees you have cash, they can (unfortunately) decide on the spot if they want to take it away from you or not. The forfeiture laws, which I consider among the most blatantly evil and un-Constitutional horrors to affect the People of this country, can cost you your cash, house, car or any other asset at the whim of the state or police. Now, that said, it is disgusting and un-Constitiutional to even allow such a thought in the first place. I am not so much afraid of the state actually doing this as I am that they even have this kind of power in the first place. If the wrong set of people come along, they can really make this into a nightmare. Hopefully we come back to our senses soon and remove some of this dangerous power from the hands of the government, like taking a knife away from a child so they don't accidentally cut themself. |
Originally Posted by etch5895
(Post 8815542)
I don't think it is quite that simple. I'm sure that they would have to prove quite a case before anything like that was allowed.
Now, that said, it is disgusting and un-Constitiutional to even allow such a thought in the first place. I am not so much afraid of the state actually doing this as I am that they even have this kind of power in the first place. If the wrong set of people come along, they can really make this into a nightmare. Hopefully we come back to our senses soon and remove some of this dangerous power from the hands of the government, like taking a knife away from a child so they don't accidentally cut themself. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 8814502)
The only limit that can be imposed on you is an arbitrary one by the state - if the state sees you have cash, they can (unfortunately) decide on the spot if they want to take it away from you or not. The forfeiture laws, which I consider among the most blatantly evil and un-Constitutional horrors to affect the People of this country, can cost you your cash, house, car or any other asset at the whim of the state or police.
"Government Seizures Victimize Innocent By Andrew Schneider and Mary Pat Flaherty Part One: The Overview February 27, 1991. Willie Jones, a second-generation nursery man in his family's Nashville business, bundles up money from last year's profits and heads off to buy flowers and shrubs in Houston. He makes this trip twice a year using cash, which the small growers prefer. But this time, as he waits at the American Airlines gate in Nashville Metro Airport, he's flanked by two police officers who escort him into a small office, search him and seize the $9,600 he's carrying. A ticket agent had alerted the officers that a large black man had paid for his ticket in bills, unusual these days. Because of the cash, and the fact that he fit a "profile" of what drug dealers supposedly look like, they believed he was buying or selling drugs. He's free to go, he's told. But they keep his money - his livelihood - and give him a receipt in its place. No evidence of wrongdoing was ever produced. No charges were ever filed. As far as anyone knows, Willie Jones neither uses drugs, nor buys or sells them. He is a gardening contractor who bought an airplane ticket. Who lost his hard-earned money to the cops. And can't get it back. That same day, an ocean away in Hawaii, federal drug agents arrive at the Maui home of retirees Joseph and Frances Lopes and claim it for the U.S. government. For 49 years, Lopes worked on a sugar plantation, living in its camp housing before buying a modest home for himself, his wife, and their adult, mentally disturbed son, Thomas. For a while, Thomas grew marijuana in the back yard - and threatened to kill himself every time his parents tried to cut it down. In 1987, the police caught Thomas, then 28. He pleaded guilty, got probation for his first offense and was ordered to see a psychologist once a week. He has, and never again has grown dope or been arrested. The family thought this episode was behind them. But earlier this year, a detective scouring old arrest records for forfeiture opportunities realized the Lopes house could be taken away because they had admitted they knew about the marijuana. The police department stands to make a bundle. If the house is sold, the police get the proceeds. Jones and the Lopes family are among the thousands of Americans each year victimized by the federal seizure law - a law meant to curb drugs by causing financial hardship to dealers. A 10-month study by The Pittsburgh Press shows the law has run amok. In their zeal to curb drugs and sometimes fill their coffers with the proceeds of what they take, local cops, federal agents and the courts have curbed innocent Americans' civil rights. From Maine to Hawaii, people who are never charged with a crime had cars, boats, money and homes taken away. In fact, 80 percent of the people who lost property to the federal government were never charged. And most of the seized items weren't the luxurious playthings of drug barons, but modest homes and simple cars and hard-earned savings of ordinary people But those goods generated $2 billion for the police departments that took them.. The owners' only crimes in many of these cases: They "looked" like drug dealers. They were black, Hispanic or flashily dressed. Others, like the Lopeses, have been connected to a crime by circumstances beyond their control. Says Eric Sterling, who helped write the law a decade ago as a lawyer on a congressional committee: "The innocent-until-proven-guilty principle has been overturned." ... ... Ethel Hylton of New York City has yet to regain her financial independence after losing $39,110 in a search nearly three years ago in Hobby Airport in Houston. Shortly after she arrived from New York, a Houston officer and Drug Enforcement Administration agent stopped the 46-year-old woman in the baggage area and told her she was under arrest because a drug dog had scratched at her luggage. The dog wasn't with them, and when Miss Hylton asked to see it, the officers refused to bring it out. The agents searched her bags, and ordered a strip search of Miss Hylton, but found no contraband. In her purse they found the cash Miss Hylton carried because she planned to buy a house to escape the New York winters which exasperated her diabetes. It was the settlement from an insurance claim, and her life's savings, gathered through more than 20 years of work as a hotel housekeeper and hospital night janitor. The police seized all but $10 of the cash and sent Miss Hylton on her way, keeping the money because of its alleged drug connection. But they never charged her with a crime. The Pittsburgh Press verified her jobs, reviewed her bank statements and substantiated her claim she had $18,000 from an insurance settlement. It also found no criminal record for her in New York City. With the mix of outrage and resignation voiced by other victims of searches, she says: "The money they took was mine. I'm allowed to have it. I earned it." Miss Hylton became a U.S. citizen six years ago. She asks, "Why did they stop me? Is it because I'm black or because I'm Jamaican?" Probably, both - although Houston police haven't said. Drug teams interviewed in dozens of airports, train stations and bus terminals and along other major highways repeatedly said they didn't stop travellers based on race. But a Pittsburgh Press examination of 121 travellers' cases in which police found no dope, made no arrest, but seized money anyway showed that 77 percent of the people stopped were black, Hispanic, or Asian. ... ... Last year, the 72 deputies of Jefferson Davis Parish led the state in forfeitures, gathering $1 million - more than their colleagues in New Orleans, a city 17 times larger than the parish. Like most states, Louisiana returns the money to law enforcement agencies, but it has one of the more unusual distributions: 60 percent goes to the police bringing a case, 20 percent to the district attorney's office prosecuting it and 20 percent to the court fund of the judge signing the forfeiture order. "The highway stops aren't much different from a smash-and-grab ring," says Lorenzi, of the Louisiana Defense Lawyers association. |
If they think you sell dope, they take the money and you have to prove where it came from.
Truly a situation of "guilty until proven innocent" and this is not a TSA thing, it's been happening in law enforcement for awhile. Part of the RICO act, I believe I know a few people who while returning from LAS after a good weekend have been stopped and questioned. Sniffing dogs can hit on $10K (+/-) because of the fact that most all cash has been handled by dope dealers/users at some point and can leave trace amounts |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 8814532)
In today's society,
... And now your paycheck's getting bigger And the Taxman pays a call, You just want to pull the trigger, Blow your brains against the wall. ... Do you count your money Instead of sheep? Artist? |
This is the reason I'll never carry more than $10 in cash. If they seize my debit card, I call my bank, report it stolen, and immediately deactivate the old card and put a new one in the mail for me. Same thing with credit cards, my driver's license, and insurance card.
|
Originally Posted by EngIceDave
(Post 8815854)
If they think you sell dope, they take the money and you have to prove where it came from.
Truly a situation of "guilty until proven innocent" and this is not a TSA thing, it's been happening in law enforcement for awhile. I know a few people who while returning from LAS after a good weekend have been stopped and questioned. Sniffing dogs can hit on $10K (+/-) because of the fact that most all cash has been handled by dope dealers/users at some point and can leave trace amounts |
Originally Posted by muddy
(Post 8815186)
That's news to me ... which state (and which law) says that? Surely it isnt exactly the way you worded it ??? (I hope)
Here's a great example provided by a 60 Minutes broadcast a few years ago: one segment interviewed a poor elderly black man who lost his life savings at the airport when cops decided he was carrying too much cash, while the next segment talked about a landlord who had his entire apartment complex seized and sold at auction after police found ONE tenant was growing marijuana in their bathroom - even though the tenant/landlord laws would have prevented the landlord from entering the apartment uninvited to discover this fact on his own. The State pretty much admitted they stole and sold his building to raise budget cash because they could get away with it. This all occurred under the Clinton/Reno era - long before Bush and Ashcroft were even a glimmer in any American's eye. If you look at Reno's track record, she almost makes Ashcroft look like one of those anti-authority crazy people hiding in the woods of Montana. Be thankful she wasn't Bush's AG. |
I'm frankly opposed to tort reform. Those multimillion-dollar judgements go a long way to preventing further wrongdoing by the defendants. The government's penalty for wrongful seizure should be up to 400x market value (minimum 10x) of ALL assets seized and any lost income (annualized) due to the loss of that asset. Meaning they take an apartment building worth $2mil in the open market, and brings in $20k a month on rent, then the government would be liable for up to $896 million in damages (minimum of $22,400,000) if it's found liable for wrongful or bad-faith seizure. Oh, and under my system, the idiot that wrongfully seized the assets would be liable for 10% of the judgement, up to $25 million.
|
I'm surprised it hasn't been said.. but if any screener tells you that they want to count your money, tell them that you'll sit patiently while a LEO explains to them that the job is above their pay grade.
|
Originally Posted by whirledtraveler
(Post 8816584)
I'm surprised it hasn't been said.. but if any screener tells you that they want to count your money, tell them that you'll sit patiently while a LEO explains to them that the job is above their pay grade.
|
I agree, keep cops away from large amounts of cash at all costs.
You may never see it again I also agree that Sheriff Nick was a total tool and wasted millions on the 2LiveCrew mess and so much more while trying to promote himself. He was a media whore and good for Ken Jenne...another tool who gets his comeuppance |
Originally Posted by mkt
(Post 8814906)
Sadly, even prior to the TSA, large amounts of cash could cause problems. To them Lots of Cash=Drugs. My grandmother was detained for about 90 minutes back in 1998 for carrying about 20 grand in large bills traveling LAS-DFW-SJU.
|
I've seen several similar scenarios involving large amounts of cash on non-international flights.
In one instance, an elderly lady whose bag had to be checked had quite an amount of cash. The screener, upon discovering it, immediately closed the bag and notified the supervisor. The reason? The screener figured it just wasn't wise to open a bag in public view with all that money in there for others to see. He asked the supervisor if the bag check could be concluded in a private screening room. The elderly lady didn't quite understand all the fuss but eventually understood that the screener was doing it for her protection. Unfortunately, the son who dropped her off witnessed the whole thing from outside the checkpoint and drew the wrong conclusion. Eventually, he calmed down and thanked the supervisor for being so thoughtful. In another instance, a screener discovered a large amount of cash belonging to a gentleman passenger. Although the screener was confused about domestic and international flight requirements, I notified the supervisor and asked that he observe the rest of the screening.The reason? With large amounts of cash like that, I wanted to protect my screener by having the supervisor and I act as witnesses just in case the passenger would later accuse my screener of theft. I asked the passenger how much money he had and then had him count the cash to make sure it was all there. Although the passenger was confused by my actions, I made sure he was satisfied that he had everything with him that he brought into the checkpoint. Had an instance when a lady accused one of my screeners of stealing a $20 bill from her purse after having searched it. I looked in the purse and there was a thick stack of large bills in one of the side pockets, and she insisted she was $20 short, and that my screener was the last one to touch it. Her husband caught up to her and reminded her that she had used a $20 to pay the taxi driver who dropped them both. Interestingly enough, she didn't think it was necessary to apologize to my screener after having made such a scene at the checkpoint. As a rule, I never allow my screeners to be alone when checking a bag with large amounts of cash inside it. I always have a witness just in case the passenger attempts to come back later with some accusation. I always make sure that the passenger has accounted for everything before leaving the checkpoint.In six years of screening, I've seen just about everything. This extra caution has always served me well for reasons already stated in here by the TSA-bashers. You may not trust me with your cash when you come to the checkpoint. And I don't trust you with all your cash when you leave the checkpoint. ;) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:08 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.