I’ve already written about the despicable practice of “civil forfeiture,” which allows governments to 
confiscate the property of innocent people who have not been convicted of any crime.
And I’ve cited great columns on the issue from George Will and John Stossel., as well a sobering report on the topic from the Wall Street Journal.
Now the Institute for Justice has a video that should outrage any decent person.
It’s examples of government thuggery like this that make me a libertarian. You should be one as well.
If you need more convincing, check out these horror stories of statist abuse.
- A story of vicious IRS persecution.
- A women jailed overnight because she let her kids play outside.
- Threatening to send a woman to jail because someone whistled at a whale.
- Two stories of innocent people who were victimized by the idiotic Drug War.
- A video about how the EPA tried – and fortunately failed – to destroy a family.
- A story about the Justice Department’s discriminatory attack on a hapless homeowner.
- The government treating child molesters more leniently than people who accidentally omit irrelevant info from forms.
But let’s end on a happy note, with a few jokes about cops, one sympathetic, one mocking, and one political.
Reblogged this on Gds44's Blog.
Civil Asset Forfeiture is a critically important issue that, unfortunately, is under the radar. Great post. I’ve blogged about it myself.
http://judymorrisreport.blogspot.com/2012/08/civil-asset-forfeiture-governments.html
Civil Asset Forfeiture – The Government’s License to Steal
[...] Should Governments Be Allowed to Steal Your Property? [...]
Hi Dan, this is also a hot button issue for me and I too was moved to post after seeing the IJ’s video. http://www.weedist.com/2012/10/drug-forfeiture-laws-an-assault-on-property-law-and-common-sense/ I kept it narrow for my particular audience but I really like your list of its abuse in many legal realms.
Judy, that is a great article you wrote. It is a great starting point for those who haven’t read up on the issue and is very thorough with even more for those of us who know something already.
I was unable to access the video from the Institute of Justice!
[...] Cops legally stole $17,000 from a man who committed no crime. [...]
[...] Cops legally stole $17,000 from a man who committed no crime. [...]
[...] Cops legally stole $17,000 from a man who committed no crime. [...]
I have been reading many of this writer’s stories about Pinhead governmental actions and feel compelled to make the following corralation to our current hysterical debate with regard to the 2nd amendment. One of the arguments being consistently put forth is the arguement that this is (deeper background checks, national registery, eliminate personal gun sales, you pick one and insert it in the blank). ______ is only a minor technical change and shouldn’t be reason enough for opposing it.”
How has thegovernment’s interpretations of the “minor” portions of the laws being enforced in Mr. Mitchell’s stories worked out? Seems to me all sense of reason has been suspended in pursuit of obedience to the “law”! Oh! This is what politicans and pundits mean by “unintended consequences” to which they say, tsk, tsk and then move on to more important work.
I say to myself O.K. sit back, take a deep breathe, breath slowly, calm down, peaceful thoughts… okay now I can post this.
[...] Cops legally stole $17,000 from a man who committed no crime. [...]
[...] Cops legally stole $17,000 from a man who committed no crime. [...]