What Guinastasia said. To me, it’s not worth the amount of hassle I’d be bringing upon myself. That’s why we have the police. Let them deal with it. I wouldn’t touch it with a 60 foot pole. Guin, I’d like to have you for a neighbor.
But possibly, taking it to the cops is what would get you “involved”. They would take your name, and from then on there would be a record that you were involved. You might have to testify in court. Your name and address might end up in the hands of the bad guys.
Whereas if you just went home with it and kept your mouth shut, you would arguably be at less risk. And somewhat wealthier too. 
If I keep the money, and spend it on anything at all, sooner or later the IRS is going to get wind of it, and I’m going to get in trouble, and meanwhile the original owner is still on the street somewhere. If I call the cops, then I don’t get in trouble, but there’s a good chance the original owner does, and one less meth dealer on the streets is a good thing. Plus, there’s even a chance that, after the cops are done using the cash as evidence, I might get it back completely legitimately (policies vary on this), or at least some sort of reward money.
Really? Look at the line directly under his username.
I think some people are overestimating the extent to which having a sack of money in your home is going to be an inconvenience. Like, by a lot. In any event, turning the money in to avoid a hassle doesn’t exactly make you a good person or a good neighbor; it just makes another selfish jerk with a different set of priorities.
If it were me, the right thing to do would be to turn it into the police. I honestly believe this. I’m also pretty sure that I would wind up keeping the cash.
That’s the question. Would it be illegal to keep it? What “trouble” would you be in? So you say, “yeah I found a bag of money”. Is the IRS authorized to take some of it? Under what tax code does that fall?
And? It’s not like you went out of your way to screw them. If they want the name and address of someone who takes lost property or suspicious equipment to the police, they could pretty much pick a name from the phonebook at random.
I think that depends on how you spend it.
Assuming the bills aren’t traceable and no one (feds or otherwise) is looking for them, spending a couple of bucks every day or two isn’t going to arouse suspicion or make you stand out. Hamburger today for lunch instead of a sandwich from home. At least that’s what I’d do. Nothing flashy, and probably not in the same location too often, either.
I’d keep the cash, but I’d be very careful about spending it. I wouldn’t buy anything valuable, but just use it for mundane expenses like gas and groceries - cash purchases with no paper trail, and nothing of any permanent value. Simply being able to have those kind of small, daily expenses always covered would free up the ability to save on my legit money and make it easier to make the monthly nut on bills, mortgage, etc, plus maybe be able to save a little bit extra on the side. I would use the drug money (which I would have absolutely no ethical qualm about keeping) to make my family’s life incremetally, modestly easier, but would never do anything to attract attention with it.
It’s a windfall gain, so it would generally be taxed the same as if you won the lottery. Some countries tax windfall gains, some don’t.
LOL. But I don’t think being honest , overall, is a dumb thing.
This is exactly what I would do.
Where can I find this duffel bag, now?
I saw a movie about this once. Not a happy ending. That shit gets thrown away ASAP.
The hypothetical fails for me at this point, as this is something I’d never do. Odds are good I’d drive around it without stopping. If I did stop, no way in hell I’d put a bag with unknown contents in my car. If I opened the bag and saw the drugs, I’d call the cops, because now my fingerprints are on the bag. I’d tell them exactly what happened, and avoid any future problems.
Well, if doing the sensible thing to avoid the hassle of a possible felony conviction makes one a selfish jerk, there are millions of us in this country. Isn’t a person who does his best to stay away from potentially troublesome situations that might land him in extreme legal trouble a good person or good neighbor, no matter what the motivation?
So no one’s worried about the dangerous chemicals that are involved with making meth? Here’s a list of stuff usually used to make it. I couldn’t live with myself dumping this shit anywhere except at a hazmat retrieval site. Some of it I would dispose of in the trash like any empty containers or the duct tape, coffee filters and other glassware, but the batteries, acetone, brake cleaner, engine starter fluid? Oh yea they’re all going to the disposal place. My answer for if they ask where it came from? I just bought a house and this was a bunch of leftover shit in the garage.
Which reminds me of another thing; how do you feel about handling money that’s also been in contact with any or all of those substances? Meth lab cooks aren’t known for their rigorous attention to detail and sanitary conditions. Most houses that have been used as meth labs have to be razed to the ground because there’s no way to get rid of all the chemicals involved.
“Selfish jerk” was just hyperbole. But no, working hard at avoiding legal trouble makes a person law-abiding. It might contribute to being a good neighbor (in that it implies unobtrusiveness), though that’s not *necessarily *true, as there are all sorts of ways to annoy others – even to your advantage – within the law. Being a good person, on the other hand, implies something other than being both selfish and timid (again, hyperbole). Intent matters. Acting out of concern for the well being of others tends to be good; acting out of concern for your own preference not to be hassled tends to be neutral or worse.
Well, you have your take on it and I have mine. If you’re a law-abiding person, what difference does the motivation for it make? Wanting to do the right thing for the good of society is also a selfish act, since we all live in it. Intent doesn’t make a difference, and I fail to see how your point about someone being an annoyance is relevant.
Annoy, anger, harm, screw over – I was referring to a whole category of behavior, and in any event, being an annoyance certainly makes you a bad neighbor.
Intent ultimately makes a difference because “law abiding” is not the same thing as “good,” and I trust I need not list examples of how one could act in strict accordance with the law and still be a bad neighbor or even a bad person. More practically, intent matters because of what it implies about the likelihood of one’s future behavior. Yes, the man who refrains from theft out of concern for his potential victim and the one who refrains out of concern for avoiding legal trouble have so far produced the same amount of good. Yet, going forward, we should expect the latter to be more willing to visit harm upon others (directly or indirectly) if and when he is not concerned about causing legal problems for himself.
I don’t think that particular argument works. Sure, if you turn in the money from the OP then society benefits from extra funding to the police (or whomever), as well as the example being set of respect for the rule of law, etc. But the advantage that the act confers upon the individual is far too diffuse and abstract to compete with the advantage to be had from simply keeping the money – a purely self-interested man who isn’t worried about legal difficulties would have to be an idiot to turn in the money (excepting other tangible considerations).
I think a better argument would be to say that turning in the money out of concern for society is selfish because it is self-satisfying: a person so inclined would be made happy if he “did the right thing” and would probably feel guilty and worried if he kept the cash. That one’s harder to argue against.
Over five years of my current annual income. Yes, I’m finding a way to keep it.