September 7, 2014 at 3:05 pm #24349
Ok all you news lovers. This was in my morning digital paper (wapo is not a favorite but my elderly father reads it). Unfortunately, not surprising…but instructional. Don’t carry cash in your vehicle! Imagine being one of those people they told their short story of and having to fight to get your money back…and meantime lose your business? Unh, unh, unh.September 7, 2014 at 6:13 pm #24361
WOW! Besides the obvious revenue generating, I wonder if this article was written to help nudge people from carrying cash. If the article’s statistics are accurate is it any wonder why minorities are distrustful of the police?September 7, 2014 at 6:47 pm #24363
As one who has seized dope dealers cash, let me say that there is more to it than is in the article.
And its less a revenue generator than one might expect.
But it is a way to drive dealers away.
Has it been misused in some places, yup.
But then so has eminent domain, and every other law/regulation.
But in this case, you are arresting the money until you can find evidence of either criminal activity or a reasonable reason for someone to possess it.
Three people in an out of state rent a car, with $30, 000 in the trunk? More than a little suspicious. Fact is, places like Memphis have a great deal of their heroin and other illegal narcotics picked up in Phoenix and driven back in just this maner.
So they choose people who have no record, are pillars of the community, or as was stated by a dope dealer on tv recently, they had a bible thumper drive, with his bible on the seat.
Yes there are people who roll around with cash, to buy heavy equipment and such, but they can both justify the carrying of the cash (cash sales get better deals) and can show where the money came from. Your dope dealers can’t.
You will also note that most cash seizures come out of heavy dope areas or border areas, smuggling cash back.September 7, 2014 at 8:34 pm #24366
I have read a number of articles on this topic and am amazed that it hasn’t risen to the Supreme Court yet in a challenge to it’s very constitutionality. I’m OK is there is a forfeiture of some sort as part of the penalty for committing a crime, but these people are not even being charged, let alone convicted, of a crime. How can it be constitutional that they pay a fine for a non-offense. A rich friend of mine always carries several thousand dollars on him just in case he needs some cash. I always keep $1,000 – $1,200 cash in my truck just in case I need cash and can’t get to an ATM or find myself stranded somewhere. I keep several thousand in cash in my home in case I wake up to a bank holiday one day, or the power is out regionally. It doesn’t seem to me that just because I might have about $5,000 in cash between my home and vehicle that I should be presumed to be a criminal.September 8, 2014 at 12:07 am #24381
Now you have hit the proverbial home run. LE considers everyone a criminal, they just didn’t catch you yet.September 8, 2014 at 12:25 am #24383
Just something else to watch for,
be careful out there!
I used to carry $2K around all the time.
Never for drugs, or anything illegal.
Cash talks, BS Walks!
"ROGUE ELECTRICIAN" Hoping to be around to re-energize the New World.....
Cogito, ergo armatus sumSeptember 8, 2014 at 12:42 am #24384
This is one of those things that falls in the catagory of too much power”that we will never misuse.” It is up to someone’s interpretation and that is a problem. Now when you look at the numbers 2 billion plus it seems like a crazy amount of money but divide it up over 13 years as they said in the article it is only about 150 to 160 million a year. There is a sign at all of the border check stations here in Texas that shows how many pounds of drugs and how many illegals have been caught or confiscated per year to date. They average 60k to 80k pounds a year at each check station. That is just what they catch. It is easy to get drugs in the city so you know the 60k pounds is just a drop in the hat. If you spread 160 million between 50 states thats only 3.2 million per state per year. I don’t like the idea of cops being able to take my money when they stop me and without any charges being filed. It seems like extortion; especially if it will cost more to get it back than what they stole but when you look at the numbers it wouldn’t take too many busts with 30k in cash confiscated nation wide to reach the numbers being reported.September 8, 2014 at 1:02 am #24385
74, they came close. A Sheriff’s Dept. Deputy who stopped me less than 2 miles from my house, but didn’t ask me about any cash. He was going up the mountain as I was going down it and we met going around a curve. The mountain is kind of steep and you have to ride your brakes down so I knew the issue was I had MA plates back then still being he couldn’t have gotten me on radar. Much of the drugs in this area come in from MA so I know he figured he had a drug dealer when he saw the MA plates. He wasn’t the brightest bulb because he somehow missed I was an old white guy driving a plane jane pickup truck with a bunch of trash in the back of it. The drug dealers that come up from Holyoke & Springfield MA are all black or Puerto Rican, none of them drive pickup trucks, and they’re either dead or in jail before they get to be my age. He doesn’t say anything about my speed but instead asks what I’m doing in town today and I tell him I own a home on the other side of the mountain. He asks if my address is current on my license, and I say yes, my legal address is in MA, this is a 2nd home. He then asks what’s my house # and I tell him the #, described the house (it’s slightly unique) and tell him the local landmark it’s next to. He then asks where am I headed. I tell him the dump, though the answer to that one was really obvious being you couldn’t miss the broken bird bath thing in the back. Then he says I was going a little fast and need to slow down. Didn’t ask about cash though. Once I got VT plates they stopped pulling me over for speeding. So that was my crime spree I suppose, driving with MA plates.September 8, 2014 at 4:02 am #24394
Okay, here’s a question for you.
Known drug dealer with no other means of support speeding through town.
Has just left customers house, no product but the cash is present.
What do you do?
Arrest with no crime? Illegal.
Arrest the money and make them prove they obtained it legally?
As to the “old white guy” aspect, just a couple months back an 85ish year old veteran was sentenced for delivering drugs, dozens of trips.
We recently had two mormon college girls arrested trafficking. They were supplementing their college funds I guess.
There is no profile that fits anymore kids, the days of the cocaine cowboys are long gone.
As to 74s comment about everyone being considered a criminal, not true. Suspicious of everyone, perhaps.September 8, 2014 at 12:19 pm #24402
Whirlibird, I have to disagree. In this country people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Police need to build their case. If they know the guy is a drug dealer, then work to catch him with the goods. There have been too many innocent people caught up in this “I think you must be guilty of something so I’m taking your money but not charging you with anything” scenarios. The Constitution does not make police both judge and jury. What they are doing with this seizure stuff is crossing the line into our being a Police State. On the old white guy thing, certainly there are exceptions to anything, but he should have been able to drop his suspicion that I was a drug dealer to less than a 1% chance rather quickly in the absence of any other clues beyond having MA plates. The VT Civil Liberties Union has charged my county with discriminating against blacks on account blacks are arrested at something like 17 times the rate of whites. Bear in mind there are virtually no blacks in VT and so the population the arrest stats are being applied against is incredibly small. A friend works at the court house and he was incensed at that charge because he says virtually all of the blacks charged with crimes in this county are not residents but rather drug dealers from Holyoke & Springfield, MA, Albany, NY, and Metro NYC. Further the locally grown white drug dealers are virtually always young and poor. I didn’t come from Holyoke or Springfield, MA by the way so there wasn’t a clue there either.
Using your example of the guy having cash but no product, that cash is going to have to be laundered somehow and will eventually make its way into a bank. Banks are required to file SAR’s (Suspicious Activity Reports) to the feds for any transaction that fits certain criteria, even when the bank knows the cash transaction is 100% legitimate. By law they can’t tell the customer that they filed an SAR. I’m on the Board of a bank and each month the President reports to us on any SAR’s that were filed, and the criteria is far more complex than people who try to game the system think it is. So, if the guy is a known drug dealer, there is stuff going on the background that might be building the case against him without the police being judge and jury.September 8, 2014 at 12:31 pm #24404
It is a violation of the 4th amendment quite clearly. We should start putting civil authorities in jail for violating the Constitution. 10 years minimum up to life for loss of life crimes. Violating the Constitution is a crime.September 8, 2014 at 12:38 pm #24405
I think there are to many gray areas in the law. Like in every profession there are good and there bad. So when we pass laws that make it easier for the police to arrest drug dealers or any criminals it can make the laws easier for the bad police officers to use on the people.
This happen when the 911 we pasted many laws that we the people lost many of our constitutional rights for safety. But do they really make us all safer? Freedom has always had dangers that is why the founding fathers wrote the Constitution and why they have the 2nd Amendment.
Guns can be used for good or bad but just because they can be used for bad things we can’t band them because we would lose all freedoms. This is why all the new laws that give way to much power to the police and other government agencies needs to be repealed. The people need to take back the freedoms we have lost.
These laws are the same as taxes. You know when the government passes a new tax they never repeal them back. So the laws they have past on the people is a way for the government to slowly take our freedoms one step at a time which is the same way they have been trying to do gun control on us but it has not worked.
It has worked for them with taking our freedoms, every time there is a terrorist attack they will try to pass a new law to take more freedoms from us and the people will just sit back and let them since they think the government is doing it for there protection.September 8, 2014 at 4:14 pm #24423
Your whole premise is based on a fraud. That being, the alleged “War on Drugs” that started way back in the late, great Depression and really caught fire during the Nixon Administration…
Guy driving a rental car, not doing anything wrong? That’s okay. Cop can legally just follow him around until he makes a driving boo-boo – maybe nicking the double yellow line – which gives him a dandy excuse to pull over Rental Car Guy.
After the “reason I pulled you over, sir”, exchange of license, rental agreement, running dudes identity, comes the “Mind if I search your car?” question.
If dude says “Yes, I mind”, it will be treated as automatically “suspicious” – enter “detaining” someone indefinitely, sniffer dogs (whose “alert posture” is most often a blank stare), and eventually some money is found, which is then taken.
If dude says “No” and some money is found, the cop will take it anyways. Rental Car Guy is screwed either way.
This just encourages Law Enforcement (emphasis on “force”) to commit armed robbery under color of law, since any alleged “drug money” will be used towards more militarized toys, overtime, padding the cops’ and DA’s budget…
I think cops should be prosecuted under RICO statutes by the FBI… why not? They operate like any organized crime syndicate. The DA encourages the cops to go out and “seize” property and cash, which is then funneled back into the cops’ budget – they literally get paid using ill-gotten loot and are protected by the DA who runs interference for them. How is this different from the Mob or any Mexican cartel?
How would YOU like it if I pulled you over at random, grabbed your Rolex off your wrist (while I had you “detained” in hand irons, sitting on the curb – “for your safety” of course, isn’t that the usual line of bullshit?) then told you “You need to prove you got this legally to get it back”…. problem is, you’re an only child and your father gave you that solid gold Rolex before he died as a birthday present… the receipt is long gone… good luck getting back your gold Rolex.
Meanwhile “Officer Safety” gets a nice shiny new watch… or else it’s sold at auction and the bucks go towards buying a new MRAP or some select fire M4’s or a few dozen more grenade launchers….
Biggest organized crime syndicate on the planet – cops.
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1September 8, 2014 at 4:53 pm #24425
MB, when I say known drug dealer, I mean I had repeatedly arrested him for it. There was no suspicion. Just missed him having it that time.
Thanks to those who have made profiling bad, we are at the point that officers treat everyone the same, that way if it comes to court, they can say without lying and bring forth witnesses, I.ie., the people they’ve pulled over, that they have treated everybody the same. Asked the same questions, made the same requests.
I know when I was doing traffic stops, it was like I was reading off a script, every time. I still have audio recordings of this. That way there was no question of what I was saying.
Treating everyone the same? It is both good and bad, believe it or don’t.
For example, 78 year old granny gums with her expired license, by policy and state law I should have arrested and cited her for her offenses, towed and impounded the car, just like I did with the illegals. Why treat her different? Because she wasn’t a criminal. Did I ask her the same questions? Yup.
You may want to review the SCOTUS exceptions and exceptions to the 4th. And the RICO laws.September 8, 2014 at 5:08 pm #24426
Oh your right, the Supreme’s said the 4th doesn’t matter if your in a car and the cops don’t need a warrant anymore.. We should all be really happy with that one.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.