2.5 Billion Dollars stolen fron Canadians visiting the USA.....by our cops!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/09/no_author/dont-take-your-cash-to-the-us/

The Canadian government has had to warn its citizens not to carry cash to the USA because the USA does not presume innocence but guilt when it comes to money. Over $2.5 billion has been confiscated from Canadians traveling to the USA funding the police who grab it.

.......That’s right. Money confiscated is usually allowed to be kept by the department who confiscated it. This is strangely working its way into funding police and pensions. This is identical to the very issue that resulted in the final collapse of Rome when the armies began to sack cities to pay for their pensions. We are at that level now with respect to seizing whatever they want knowing you will have to spend more in legal fees to assert your rights that do not really exist.

Those trying to flee tyranny elsewhere can not bring money with them for the police get to take it on this end. This pretend war on terrorism is really a wholesale war against the people. It serves as the justification to seize whatever they desire ever since 9/11 as reported by the Washington Post.

all police are evil

what should we do about it?

Take away their automatic power to seize.  

What started out as a way to seize assets of millions from drug traffickers has been perverted into an insidious method of police thievery... in violation of our Constitution.

Eric wrote:

Take away their automatic power to seize.  

What started out as a way to seize assets of millions from drug traffickers has been perverted into an insidious method of police thievery... in violation of our Constitution.

Who in the government has the power to remove that power from them?

The governor?

Who ever it is, then we should make sure it is a election issue.

Information gleaned off the 'net:

Quote :

The search and seizure provisions of the Fourth Amendment are all about privacy. To honor this freedom, the Fourth Amendment protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures by state or federal law enforcement authorities.

The flip side is that the Fourth Amendment does permit searches and seizures that are considered reasonable. In practice, this means that the police may override your privacy concerns and conduct a search of you, your home, barn, car, boat, office, personal or business documents, bank account records, trash barrel, or whatever, if:

the police have probable cause to believe they can find evidence that you committed a crime, and a judge issues a search warrant, or

the particular circumstances justify the search without a warrant first being issued.

The police are obviously overreaching the definition of "probable cause". This needs to be defined by Congress AND States, since their police forces operate separately without regard for the other.

Something I wasn't aware of:

Quote :

Private security personnel currently outnumber police officers in the United States by three to one. As a result, whether you're shopping in a supermarket or a pharmacy, working in an office building, or visiting a friend in a housing project, you may be more likely to be confronted by a security guard than by a police officer. At the present time, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to searches carried out by non-governmental employees like private security guards.

For example, assume that a shopping mall security guard acting on a pure hunch searches a teenager's backpack. Inside the backpack the guard finds a baggie containing an illegal drug. The guard can detain the teenager, call the police, and turn the drug over to a police officer. The drug is admissible in evidence, because the search was conducted by a private security guard. As private security guards increasingly exercise traditional police functions, courts may one day apply Fourth Amendment guidelines to their conduct.

I think it is high time that we, doing our duties as citizens, push our state and federal representatives to define "probable cause" to exclude the mere existence of assets without evidence of wrongdoing.

Stay tuned for how to spread the word.

I'm on board with that. I don't like gray areas when it comes to laws. I think laws need to be well defined.

And I would also be on board for a disciplinary action brought against those officers who mid use this provision for personal gain as a deterrent for them to only use this law when they are pretty much sure it's going to apply

It is too easy for them to seize cash, jewelry, and other assets without due process.

In other words, persons facing civil forfeiture of assets should be entitled to adequate notice, a hearing, and a neutral judge.

LEOs might be reluctant to seize assets if they knew they had to prepare and argue a case before a judge. They would look pretty stupid if all they could say is that "I suspected that the cash was proceeds from an illegal proceeding" with no proof to that effect.

To contact Representative Jeff Miller (Escambia, Santa Rosa, and Walton Counties) click here:
https://jeffmiller.house.gov/contact/contactform.htm

Fill out your contact information, and paste this text into the comments.  DON'T FORGET TO ADD YOUR NAME TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS TEXT.  

---

---

The Honorable Jeff Miller
United States House of Representatives
336 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-0901

Re: Lack of due process for civil forfeitures

Dear Representative Miller:

I am a resident and voter in the 1st Congressional district of Florida.  I am fearful of law enforcement's interpretation of our Constitution's Fourth Amendment.  Specifically, law enforcement officers seize cash and property under the guise of "probable cause" simply because the cash or property exists... without any proof of criminal intent.  I ask that you please help fight against this practice.

While this practice is rooted in good intentions related to drug trafficking and money laundering, law enforcement has made law-abiding citizens their private cash cow.  The average citizen cannot carry cash on his self for any reason without fear of civil forfeiture.

According to the Washington Post:
"There have been 61,998 cash seizures made on highways and elsewhere since 9/11 without search warrants or indictments through the Equitable Sharing Program, totaling more than $2.5 billion. State and local authorities kept more than $1.7 billion of that while Justice, Homeland Security and other federal agencies received $800 million. Half of the seizures were below $8,800."
 
I respectfully request that you sponsor or co-sponsor a bill in the House of Representatives to define "probable cause" such that actual proof of criminal intent be present in lieu of an unfounded "suspicion" that a crime has occurred.  In addition, civil forfeiture of such assets should be allowed only after procedural due process afforded by our Constitution's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

In other words, persons facing civil forfeiture of assets should be entitled to adequate notice, a hearing, and a neutral judge.

I look forward to your assistance in this matter and your reply as to your intentions.

Respectfully Submitted,

Chrissy, I think Curt Clawson is your Congressional Representative.  Assuming you are in Cape Coral, click here http://clawson.house.gov/contact/contactform.htm?zip5=33991&zip4=

Of course, you will need to fill out your contact information.  Anonymous e-mails will get trashed.

Here is a letter directed at him.

---

---

The Honorable Curt Clawson
United States House of Representatives
1123 Longworth House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515

Re: Lack of due process for civil forfeitures

Dear Representative Clawson:

I am a resident and voter in the 19th Congressional district of Florida.  I am fearful of law enforcement's interpretation of our Constitution's Forth Amendment.  Specifically, law enforcement officers seize cash and property under the guise of "probable cause" simply because the cash or property exists... without any proof of criminal intent.  I ask that you please help fight against this practice.

While this practice is rooted in good intentions related to drug trafficking and money laundering, law enforcement has made law-abiding citizens their private cash cow.  The average citizen cannot carry cash on his self for any reason without fear of civil forfeiture.

According to the Washington Post:
"There have been 61,998 cash seizures made on highways and elsewhere since 9/11 without search warrants or indictments through the Equitable Sharing Program, totaling more than $2.5 billion. State and local authorities kept more than $1.7 billion of that while Justice, Homeland Security and other federal agencies received $800 million. Half of the seizures were below $8,800."

I respectfully request that you sponsor or co-sponsor a bill in the House of Representatives to define "probable cause" such that actual proof of criminal intent be present in lieu of an unfounded "suspicion" that a crime has occurred.  In addition, civil forfeiture of such assets should be allowed only after procedural due process afforded by our Constitution's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

In other words, persons facing civil forfeiture of assets should be entitled to adequate notice, a hearing, and a neutral judge.

I look forward to your assistance in this matter and your reply as to your intentions.

Respectfully Submitted,

More letters for Senators to follow.

Eric wrote:

Chrissy, I think Curt Clawson is your Congressional Representative.  Assuming you are in Cape Coral, click here http://clawson.house.gov/contact/contactform.htm?zip5=33991&zip4=

Of course, you will need to fill out your contact information.  Anonymous e-mails will get trashed.

Here is a letter directed at him.

---

---

The Honorable Curt Clawson
United States House of Representatives
1123 Longworth House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515

Re: Lack of due process for civil forfeitures

Dear Representative Clawson:

I am a resident and voter in the 19th Congressional district of Florida.  I am fearful of law enforcement's interpretation of our Constitution's Forth Amendment.  Specifically, law enforcement officers seize cash and property under the guise of "probable cause" simply because the cash or property exists... without any proof of criminal intent.  I ask that you please help fight against this practice.

While this practice is rooted in good intentions related to drug trafficking and money laundering, law enforcement has made law-abiding citizens their private cash cow.  The average citizen cannot carry cash on his self for any reason without fear of civil forfeiture.

According to the Washington Post:
"There have been 61,998 cash seizures made on highways and elsewhere since 9/11 without search warrants or indictments through the Equitable Sharing Program, totaling more than $2.5 billion. State and local authorities kept more than $1.7 billion of that while Justice, Homeland Security and other federal agencies received $800 million. Half of the seizures were below $8,800."

I respectfully request that you sponsor or co-sponsor a bill in the House of Representatives to define "probable cause" such that actual proof of criminal intent be present in lieu of an unfounded "suspicion" that a crime has occurred.  In addition, civil forfeiture of such assets should be allowed only after procedural due process afforded by our Constitution's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.

In other words, persons facing civil forfeiture of assets should be entitled to adequate notice, a hearing, and a neutral judge.

I look forward to your assistance in this matter and your reply as to your intentions.

Respectfully Submitted,

Thank you. I will certainly write him. I write my representatives from time to time.

I think if a person is found innocent or no crime can be proved, then why are they keeping it?

Usually, there are no arrests involved, hence, no "finding of innocent/proving of a crime".

They want the money to fund their departments, buy goodies for their departments and even pay into their pension funds.

The cops just grab your money because they can say they believe it was ill-gotten gains.  If you protest right then and there, I have read that they threaten you with arrest for trumped-up crimes until you relent and sign the money over to them.

I remember one lady with kids in the car was told by the cops that they were going to take her kids away from her unless she relinquished the money to the cops.

It's a damn racket and it makes me sick.

Eric wrote:

Usually, there are no arrests involved, hence, no "finding of innocent/proving of a crime".

They want the money to fund their departments, buy goodies for their departments and even pay into their pension funds.

The cops just grab your money because they can say they believe it was ill-gotten gains.  If you protest right then and there, I have read that they threaten you with arrest for trumped-up crimes until you relent and sign the money over to them.

I remember one lady with kids in the car was told by the cops that they were going to take her kids away from her unless she relinquished the money to the cops.

It's a damn racket and it makes me sick.

That's my point.

They should not be able to seize anything unless they are going to arrest you.

Them taking anything from you and not arresting you constitutes bribery to me

It's pure simple theft and the cops should be prosecuted and punished the same as if you or I did the crime.. The hard thing is finding a judge that will punish someone severely enough to prevent it from happening again..

its a bribe if they take your stuff and don't arrest you.

That's is exactly how I will be presenting my letter.

Actually it's called highway robbery if they have guns, stop you on the highway and take your property under threat of death. Held up by bandits with stinking badges.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

Actually it's called highway robbery if they have guns, stop you on the highway and take your property under threat of death.   Held up by bandits with stinking badges.

sometimes I want to loan you a drama queen skirt

Really. If the cops demand your cash and you decide not to give it to them you all be found guilty of resisting arrest and packing a gun shaped cellphone and bleed out on the highway just like if bandits shot you.

Each govt dept/agency is trying to expand it's authority... the border patrol can now set up check points as much as one hundred miles from a border. Though I'd love to stop this one practice... the core issue is systemic.