“The only thing that stops a [bad] guy with a gun permit is a [good] guy with a gun permit.”
Wayne LaPierre, probably
This seems, uh, problematic
Isn’t the entire point of having an armored car is that they are allowed to shoot people trying to rob it?
This video goes into a bit of detail. One of the armoured cars was pulled over for ‘signaling too soon’. That was used as the probable grounds for the search. Bullshit Nazi tactics and outright theft. Right wing belief on crime and punishment on open display.
Civil Asset Forfeiture is the most bizarringly unconstitutional activity that is openly committed by our government.
And incredibly popular among people who want to keep the government off your back in every way.
They are the people that think that it’s only criminals that are subject to it, good law abiding people would never be targeted.
it says nothing about cars
and money is not property
this SCotUS will most certainly protect the divine right of CAF
But the property committed the violation, and the property doesn’t have rights. The property should have incorporated so it could have the rights of a person.
Does it help if you put gold fringe on your property?
But the money is not property, at least, that’s what people are saying.
For reasons, I will be moving $20k from my bank to open a new account at another bank. They are 5 miles away from each other so I could definitely do it as cash. The one reason I won’t is fear of being stopped by cops for “low taillight fluid” or “signaling a lane change” or something and CAF gets my money even though the nature of the money will show a clear paper trail of how I got it and what I’m doing with it.
You are not really required to inform the police that you have cash on you. They can ask, but you should be able to obfuscate or straight up lie. They can lie to you, just lie to them. And make sure the money is on your person, tucked inside your shirt or somesuch, where they would have to do a full body search to find it. 20K is about eight bundles of hundreds, which is fairly compact (assuming bank 1 has that much actual cash on hand).
One of these is illegal, he other is not.
This fucking shameful, not mention criminal.
This time the cops seized about $350,000. The deputies, who were audibly excited about the $700,000 haul, were somewhat disappointed by the relatively small size of the second seizure. Based on an audio recording by the van’s security system, the lawsuit describes this exchange: “One of the deputies said, ‘That’s it?’ and chuckled. He then said: ‘You set the bar too high.’ When another deputy remarked that he thought they’d get ‘a million or two,’ the [first] deputy responded, ‘At least we got over a million’”—apparently referring to the combined take from the two seizures.
Thieves. Far worse than they criminals they are supposed to protect us from.
The article said that the armored car company covered the losses, is that typical? It does seem as though it would be a bit unkind to pass the loss onto your customer.
I would think that there would be some sort of insurance that should cover theft, but that might not be applicable if the highway bandits are operating under cover of government authority.
You’re right, s/property/asset/.
The asset committed the violation.
I dunno. This site says money IS property.
Legal Definition of Property | UpCounsel 2023.
This one also:
And this one.
That is a long list, but there is one thing notably absent: “cash”. It does say “money”, but that is a broadly ambiguous term. Cash itself is not money per se, merely the representation of it.
I am willing to go on record that the cops can take as much of my cash as they like, as long as I get to keep the money.