The Drug Enforcement Agency is a joke. Once again they have declined to reschedule cannabis. They still claim it has no medical uses despite the overwhelming evidence. They still liken it to heroin or LSD.

This is true. Cannabis produces the same mental debilitation as other drugs without the physical withdrawal problems. This contributes to a false complacncy regarding the use of the drug.

In practice a person can live in a dung pile using cannabis. The same person can also demand that other people live in the same dung pile when influenced by cannabis.

“Of 87 cases USA Today identified in which the DEA seized cash after flagging a suspicious itinerary, only two resulted in the alleged courier being charged with a crime,”

Any thoughts on this you medical quack?

There are two separate issues here. You are attempting to combine them as one.

"Most often, agents seize large sums of cash — “sometimes totaling $50,000 or more, stuffed into suitcases or socks” — leaving a receipt in its place"

Now that's funny.

Cannabis produces the same mental debilitation as other drugs

Irrelevant to its medical properties, and equally true of alcohol.

Cannabis produces the same mental debilitation as other drugs without the physical withdrawal problems.

I think the potential adverse psychological effects of marijuana are often underplayed. Perhaps that is because they were overplayed in the past.

Marijuana can definitely cause anxiety and panic states.

equally true of alcohol.

Alcohol just brings out your true self, or at least your true self at that particular time.

Marijuana alters your way of thinking.

leaving a receipt in its place"

Next, Drug addict lovers will piss themselves in anger that they can't use the receipt for a tax write off and business expense. lol

Next, Drug addict lovers will piss themselves in anger

I'd say the innocent people who have their money stolen should be angry, how about you?

“Of 87 cases USA Today identified in which the DEA seized cash after flagging a suspicious itinerary, only two resulted in the alleged courier being charged with a crime,”

Do the math, that works out to less than 3%.

.0229 to be exact.

But what the hell - they must have been guilty of something right?

I'd say the innocent people who have their money stolen should be angry, how about you?

That's the problem with you drug addict loving Paultards. You don't know the meaning of innocent in a world of anything goes.

Shut your shit lips.

You don't know the meaning of innocent in a world of anything goes.

Attaboy - typical cop attitude.

Everyone is guilty of something, right?

No wonder cops like you are reviled by freedom loving Americans.

“Of 87 cases USA Today identified in which the DEA seized cash after flagging a suspicious itinerary, only two resulted in the alleged courier being charged with a crime,”

Less than 3% guilty, yet the state-sponsored thieves keep stealing from innocent citizens.

Why don't you move the fuck someplace where your fascist views are welcome?

“To put it simply,” USA Today observed in 2013, law enforcement is “developing an addiction to drug money.”

Who are the real addicts?

Alcohol just brings out your true self, or at least your true self at that particular time.

Marijuana alters your way of thinking.

I've used both and seen them used, and I don't agree with your characterization. In exactly what way do you claim "marijuana alters your way of thinking" that alcohol doesn't?

Attaboy - typical cop attitude.

Everyone is guilty of something, right?

Attaboy - typical anarchist/paultard PROPAGANDA.

All the cops are corrupt, right?

All the cops are corrupt, right?

Going by the facts posted in this article, over 87% of them are.

Asset forfeiture has spurned so much controversy, the Department of Justice halted the program in late December 2015 — but the respite for the American public didn’t last long. Just three months later, the DOJ reinstated its highly lucrative property plundering, because revenue — from the government’s standpoint, what better way exists to rob the public blind with veritable impunity.

False. The DOJ suspended the "equitable sharing program" which allowed local police to keep a portion of the seized assets. It did not shut down the Federal asset forfeiture program.

Without arrests or charges — without crime — attached to almost any of the DEA’s cash grabs, how the program remains legal is anyone’s guess.

This, of course, is nonsense, as any reading of the actual statute would make clear. It reads as a launtry list of crimes that can authorize the seizure of related property. The asset seizure is justified by a claim that it was used to commit or facilitate a crime, or that it violates customs laws. When the asset is seized as property used to commit or facilitate the commission of a criminal offense, it is not necessary to charge or convict or identify any individual as having committed the offense. It is sufficient to show that the asset was used to commit or facilitate a crime.

Asset forfeiture remains legal because the government has the lawful power to seize property used to commit or facilitate a crime.

That the statute may be abused does not mean that the Act is unconstitutional or that drug dealers get to keep their ill-gotten assets.

The asset forfeiture proceeding is a civil proceeding against the asset.

http://law.justia.com/codes/us/2014/title-18/part-i/chapter-46/sec.-981/

18 U.S.C. § 981 (2014)

§981. Civil forfeiture

(a)(1) The following property is subject to forfeiture to the United States:

(A) Any property, real or personal, involved in a transaction or attempted transaction in violation of section 1956, 1957 or 1960 of this title, or any property traceable to such property.

(B) Any property, real or personal, within the jurisdiction of the United States, constituting, derived from, or traceable to, any proceeds obtained directly or indirectly from an offense against a foreign nation, or any property used to facilitate such an offense, if the offense—

(i) involves trafficking in nuclear, chemical, biological, or radiological weapons technology or material, or the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of a controlled substance (as that term is defined for purposes of the Controlled Substances Act), or any other conduct described in section 1956(c)(7)(B);

(ii) would be punishable within the jurisdiction of the foreign nation by death or imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year; and

(iii) would be punishable under the laws of the United States by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, if the act or activity constituting the offense had occurred within the jurisdiction of the United States.

[snip]

18 U.S.C. § 981 (2014)

§981. Civil forfeiture

The illegal legislation is NOT law, because it's an unconstitutional violation of due process.

The illegal legislation is NOT law, because it's an unconstitutional violation of due process.

It is the law. You can look it up. Your huffing and puffing otherwise does not nullify the law.

False. The DOJ suspended the "equitable sharing program"...

What, no 50GB of spam in an attempt to back your ludicrous claim?

You really need to keep up with the news you ambulance-chasing shyster.

The feds have resumed a controversial program that lets cops take stuff and keep it

The Justice Department has announced that it is resuming a controversial practice that allows local police departments to funnel a large portion of assets seized from citizens into their own coffers under federal law.

The "Equitable Sharing Program" gives police the option of prosecuting some asset forfeiture cases under federal instead of state law, particularly in instances where local law enforcement officers have a relationship with federal authorities as part of a joint task force. Federal forfeiture policies are more permissive than many state policies, allowing police to keep up to 80 percent of assets they seize.

You're a fucking tool.

Asset forfeiture remains legal because the government has the lawful power to seize property used to commit or facilitate a crime.

Stupid opinion using flawed logic, seeing that the govt is seizing the property BEFORE PROVING that a crime was committed.

(We must now prepare for reams of spam, insisting that Chan's opinions MUST NOT BE QUESTIONED)

You can look it up

Thievery! Obama can't just call someone a name, and then steal their property because you think that they might vote for Vermin Supreme, or something.

You have a right to confront your accuser, and be judged by a jury of your peers, etc....

When the asset is seized as property used to commit or facilitate the commission of a criminal offense, it is not necessary to charge or convict or identify any individual as having committed the offense. It is sufficient to show that the asset was used to commit or facilitate a crime.

And the contemptibly laughable fiction that the property owner is not being punished even carries over to the case names: things like U.S. v $193,458.

Such chicanery, like anyone who supports it, is unworthy of a free country.

You're a fucking tool.

You're a fucking idiot.

Stupid opinion using flawed logic, seeing that the govt is seizing the property BEFORE PROVING that a crime was committed.

If your drug money is seized, try presenting your crap to a court.

Your huffing and puffing does not nullify the law. It's still there.

Such chicanery, like anyone who supports it, is unworthy of a free country.

Tell it to Congress, they enacted the law, almost unanimous in the House and unanimous in the Senate.

Love it or hate it, it's still the law.

Thievery! Obama can't just call someone a name, and then steal their property because you think that they might vote for Vermin Supreme, or something.

You have a right to confront your accuser, and be judged by a jury of your peers, etc....

You are not accused in a CIVIL Asset Forfeiture proceeding. You are not entitled to a jury trial. You are not on trial.

The Civil Asset Seizure Reform Act of 2000 was not signed by Obama. Nor was it repealed by Bush.

The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of April 25, 2000, was introduced by Republican Henry Hyde and signed into law by President Clinton. It passed the House 375-48. Passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

‘‘(c) BURDEN OF PROOF.—In a suit or action brought under any civil forfeiture statute for the civil forfeiture of any property—

‘‘(1) the burden of proof is on the Government to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the property is subject to forfeiture;

‘‘(2) the Government may use evidence gathered after the filing of a complaint for forfeiture to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that property is subject to forfeiture; and

‘‘(3) if the Government’s theory of forfeiture is that the property was used to commit or facilitate the commission of a criminal offense, or was involved in the commission of a criminal offense, the Government shall establish that there was a substantial connection between the property and the offense."

114 Stat. 205-06.

‘‘(d) INNOCENT OWNER DEFENSE.—

‘‘(1) An innocent owner’s interest in property shall not be forfeited under any civil forfeiture statute. The claimant shall have the burden of proving that the claimant is an innocent owner by a preponderance of the evidence.

114 Stat. 206

Your huffing and puffing does not nullify the law. It's still there.

Your disdain for logic, and constitutional law is well documented, nolu.

Keep dreaming that anyone here supports your idiocy.

it is not necessary to charge or convict or identify any individual as having committed the offense. It is sufficient to show that the asset was used to commit or facilitate a crime.

I've tried to tell that stupid F*ck, Puketard, this... and he's too F'n stupid to comprehend anything but what THC stands for.

too F'n stupid to comprehend anything

I've tried to tell that stupid F*ck, Puketard, this... and he's too F'n stupid to comprehend anything but what THC stands for.

He knows that he is saying is bullshit. He just likes to be an asshole. If you believe his bullshit, he is about an eighty year old asshole.

lol

The toughest and most scorned 1960's hippie asshole with a walker.

Nah, he enlisted at 18 in January 1955. By his long-told internet history, he must be at least 79 years old. If he enlisted at about 18 and 5 months. then he would be 80.

Now he is the most scorned keyboard commando with a walker in his mother's basement, doing his impression of an aging millenial. His big hope is that his mother replaces his Commodore 64 for Christmas and gets him that onesey he has wanted ever since he first saw pajama boy.

False. The DOJ suspended the "equitable sharing program"...

What, no 50GB of spam in an attempt to back your ludicrous claim?

You really need to keep up with the news you ambulance-chasing shyster.

The feds have resumed a controversial program that lets cops take stuff and keep it

No shit, Sherlock. Try reading the article. The Feds suspended the Equitable Sharing Program and then reinstated it.

The Equitable Sharing Program gives state police the option of processing asset forfeiture cases under Federal law.

The suspension of that program never affected Federal processing of asset forfeiture cases in any way. It never affected the ability of the DEA or any Federal agency to process such cases. It affected State agencies.

Damn, you're dumb.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/28/the-feds-have-resumed-a-controversial-program-that-lets-cops-take-stuff-and-keep-it/

The Justice Department has announced that it is resuming a controversial practice that allows local police departments to funnel a large portion of assets seized from citizens into their own coffers under federal law.

The "Equitable Sharing Program" gives police the option of prosecuting some asset forfeiture cases under federal instead of state law, particularly in instances where local law enforcement officers have a relationship with federal authorities as part of a joint task force. Federal forfeiture policies are more permissive than many state policies, allowing police to keep up to 80 percent of assets they seize.

GrandIsland (#32) -- (Tpaine is) The toughest and most scorned 1960's hippie asshole with a walker.

Don't need a walker, I'm loosing my 'tough' rapidly, -- And I was never a hippy. -- The beat generation was the 'in thing' just before I got married.

nolu spam --- Nah, he enlisted at 18 in January 1955. By his long-told internet history, he must be at least 79 years old. If he enlisted at about 18 and 5 months. then he would be 80.

Gee, the sham spammer knows how to use arithmetic. -- I'll be 80 in Dec.

Now he is the most scorned keyboard commando with a walker in his mother's basement, doing his impression of an aging millenial. His big hope is that his mother replaces his Commodore 64 for Christmas and gets him that onesey he has wanted ever since he first saw pajama boy.

My mother died years ago, at 96, you creep. -- What's with the 'pajama boy' crap? -- Are you gay?