After all, the post is called Uncle Bait. One of the Brutal Huggers (I can’t tell them apart) writes:

Asset forfeiture is a way for the government to take your property. Regardless of whether you’ve committed a crime, they can (and have!) seize cash, cars, houses, computers, and anything else whether they can carry it away or sell it on the spot. They can do this without convicting you of any crime. They can do this without even charging you with a crime!

If you want your property back, you have to sue the government to get it. And you’ll lose. It’s extremely difficult to win because you have the impossible burden of proving a negative– i.e. that your property hasn’t been even remotely involved in any criminal activity.

While you’re hopelessly suing the government to get your stuff back, your local police will be auctioning it off and pocketing the money. Law enforcement agencies make money from seizing your property. Talk about perverse incentives! It’s a recipe for corruption and just another way the drug war pits common citizens against the authoritarian police state.

First, the government needs to be reminded of this little thing called the Fourth Amendment. Secondly, BH states that Kerry is the same as Bush on the issue.

Pardon me while I put on my Libertarian hat for a minute:

A problem with government officials and politicians (almost all of them) is their desire for the government to have control over people. They want to control you or the system is set up for control. It allows them to rule. They want a government that is huge as it guarantees power, a livelihood, or some other benefit to them and other civil servants. The fact is, no prominent politician would take a stand on this issue because of the political fallout (loss of police support, viewed as soft on crime, makes you sound crazy, etc.). Yet this issue is important and results in government oppression. This is also the case with many other issues.

You’ll never rarely hear a politician talk seriously and legitimately about eminent domain abuse; no-knock warrants; asset seizure (it’s not a forfeiture); the drug war; egregious zoning practices; bogus racketeering charges; the legal system bullying juries; subsidies and other hideous practices by the USDA; the legal system getting innocent people to plead down because they can’t afford to fight the system and it’s easier to do jail time; or taxing to destroy something or someone. And there is no difference between nearly any political candidate or his opponent nor is there a difference among the two parties on these issues.

The courts have, time and again, let things slide as well. They didn’t take a stand for the first amendment on campaign finance reform, nor the second amendment in a variety of cases. Heck, they ruled that indoor plumbing makes no-knock warrants acceptable because you might flush something down the toilet. And, my personal favorite, random roadblock searches are legal as long as they stop everybody. I guess they really need to read the fourth amendment.

Think about it. They can take your car for a sack of fucking weed or some pills that you don’t have a doctor’s note for. Or they’ll take your house because they want to put a strip mall there. Martha Stewart is going to jail for lying about a crime the government couldn’t prove she committed. They can confiscate large amounts of cash merely because someone thinks it’s unusual for people to carry large amounts of cash. They even take your damn toenail clippers at the airport.

Addressing these issues in the political arena would not be popular. It would scare the little people. And it would make the the big ol’ government look corrupt (rather, look more corrupt). They need you stupid. They need you compliant. They need you poor so you must rely on them. They have to feed the beast somehow.

Do you really want this same bureaucracy handling your health care?

I’ll quote myself (bad form, I know, but it will illustrate what I mean):

Kevin, who thinks that we are on the downward spiral to a total loss of freedom, asks:

Believing what we believe, is it moral for us to let it happen without standing up and pledging our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to fight it? I have grandchildren. What do I owe them?

Despite my efforts at:

Putting up a sign in my yard that says the court system is a joke;

Making machine guns;

Refusal to give authorities ID;

Buying up property that may some day benefit the public good;

Starting my own un-licensed business;

Setting my water heater to 130 degrees;

Writing a book that tells people not to pay taxes;

Importing lobster tails of less than 5.5 inches;

Growing orchids;

Buying, with a personal check, significant quantities of indoor gardening lights to care for my begonias;

Carrying large amounts of cash;

Missing the occasional tax payment;

Using unusually high amounts of electricity (for the begonias);

Building model rockets;

Doing home improvements without getting government permission;

Being a smart ass to TSA employees and wearing a Hi, I’m a terrorist button on planes;

Taking pictures of my nephews bathing to get developed;

I have yet to encounter any targets of opportunity. They must be raiding the wrong houses. All kidding aside, I don’t do most of those things but those very actions have been cause for our government to trample liberties. And no one (but me and a few bloggers, apparently) gets angry about it.

I think our apathetic public is just unwilling to rise up about injustice. Not many people take to the streets in protest of our lost civil liberties. Not many practice civil disobedience.

Nevermind, Janet Jackson just showed her other boob.

Could you imagine the look on the face of a George Bush or a John Kerry if you asked them in a debate which won’t happen because it may make them think and they don’t have a prepared statement):

So, the drug war costs billions and billions and billions of dollars. Many innocent, peaceable citizens have been needlessly killed by a police force that has been essentially militarized. People are not secure in their homes because of no knock warrants and search warrants issued based on the frequently false testimony of criminals. Property is taken and lives are destroyed over a few minuscule amounts of drugs. Is it worth that price to confiscate an infinitesimally small fraction of a percent of the drug supply in this country?

Their responses would be:

Look over there, terrorists.

And fags.

So make noise about these issues, if they’re important to you.

Posted in uncategorized on October 7th, 2004 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |