0
15

[–] SayTan 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

My firearms got burglarized. Unfortunately, they were recovered by BATFE. They don't want to give them back.

1
4

[–] Al_Rubyx 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Happened to my dad AND my uncle. About 20 guns were stolen, dad tracked them down, police said "thanks for the guns these are evidence now, forever"

0
2

[–] SayTan 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

They first said "how do we know you didn't file a claim?", like that had anything to do with it...they still haven't stopped excuses. Haven't heard never yet...

0
0

[–] Mr_Wizard 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

BATFE?

EDIT: NEVERMIND. I searched on Yahoo for it. That's a lie, I used Lycos, and then Altavista.

0
0

[–] SayTan 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Sadly, I am serviced by the same office that serviced the Branch Davidians.

0
0

[–] firex726 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

What is the reasoning they need to keep them anyways?

0
0

[–] whitewomenarewhores 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Free guns.

0
11

[–] EarlPoncho 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

i would expect this to be the case every year honestly

1
5

[–] Reddiggoat 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

Right? I mean, taxes for one...

3
-2

[–] Lodley 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago 

Yea I mean they do take drugs and money from organized crime. Not all the civil forfeiture are these obviously innocent stories you hear.

0
9

[–] Spazedinvader 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

This may be true. But they need that stuff so the Police can buy Tanks and other military assault gear. Don't you feel safer?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
9

[–] leweb 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

No, those are the ones who become federal agents.

0
2

[–] luckyguy 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I'm not the burglar America needs but I'm the burglar America deserves. For America!

1
7

[–] Quawonk 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

Ah, but it's not stealing when they do it!

They just call it 'confiscating' or 'seizing' and that makes it OK!

0
3

[–] kantskittens 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

A couple of things before we get our panties in a bunch:

a graphic showing forfeiture funds 01-14

Where it's from:

Like many of the more controversial aspects of the present-day criminal justice system, civil asset forfeiture's roots lie in the war on drugs. In the 1980s, law enforcement officers said they needed a tool to help capture cartel leaders and large-scale drug traffickers, who are difficult to pin criminal cases on. So Congress amended the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act to create the Department of Justice's Asset Forfeiture Fund.

30 years down the line, who's affected:

evidence suggests that forfeiture proceedings are often initiated against small time criminals or people who aren't criminals at all. An American Civil Liberties Union report earlier this year found that the median amount seized in forfeiture actions in Philadelphia amounted to $192. These forfeiture actions were concentrated in the city's poorest neighborhoods, the report found.

The glaring question that needs answering is the why's and how's in the minds of the police officers actually doing it.

And if the answer is “kind of like pennies from heaven. It gets you a toy or something that you need is the way that we typically look at it to be perfectly honest”, what does this say about their funding in the first place - you know, the raison d'être of taxes

0
2

[–] Avnomke 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Reading that, it sounds like something to get our panties in a bunch about.

0
1

[–] kantskittens 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I sometimes get ahead of myself :P

But yes, you're absolutely right. This really does deserve outrage
However: we really need to be outraged for the right reasons.

This is the result of a near 50-year old policy put in place by conservative administrations (ratified by Nixon, later amended by Reagan, as specified by the WP article), to combat a very real problem they themselves not only defined and treated as criminal, but might also have been not only a part of, but also fueling.

They should not be allowed to first create the problem, then later say "we told you so" like they have with the war on drugs, or similarly like they have with national debt: Lower taxes to constrain gvmnt spending, take loans to balance the budget, complain about the newly created debt.

This is not an example of "big government gone too far", this is another example of a certain party whose policies too often only work in a fantasy world.

Either the nations police departments receives funding from fair and sound taxes, or they get their funds from "other sources", eg forfeitures, private donations or subscription plans.
One works and is fair, the other is a crate of TNT on fire.

0
2

[–] cyks 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

So many useless words to persuade us to not "get our panties in a bunch." You should work for the MSM.

0
1

[–] Frankensauce 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

The pennies from heaven quote was an official statement by a police chief describing what the funds were used for.

0
0

[–] crankypants15 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

bilions

The Institute of Justice can't spell. Does anyone else find that funny?

0
0

[–] kantskittens 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's the Washington Post that can't spell, but nice catch none the less :)

0
3

[–] theoldguy 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Well, sure, when you have the entire power of the U.S. government behind you.

0
2

[–] HoneyNutStallmans 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

~

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

load more comments ▼ (2 remaining)