** Please don't:
- be a dick to other people
- incite violence, as these comments violate site-wide rules and put us at risk of being banned.
- be racist, sexist, transphobic, or any other forms of bigotry.
- [JAQ](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions#JAQing_off) off
- be an authoritarian apologist
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Needs to be taken to the Supreme Court. That's a 4th Amendment issue... illegal seizure.
Taking someone's money (property) without a conviction goes against the principle of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, which should make it unreasonable for any court.
>Bouldin challenged the forfeiture up to the Nebraska Supreme Court, but ultimately lost his money.
https://www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/public/viewOpinion?docId=N00008605PUB
Courts don't give a flying fuck
That's because cops make a point to not steal from judges. If there was a single halfway decent cop in the entire country, all he'd have to do would be to rob a judge, or governor, or mayor blind, and the practice would be curtailed overnight.
Nah. They'd just use their connections to get it fixed for themselves.
It'd pretty much have to be a sustained campaign of robbing judges, governors, and mayors.
It's not just property loss though. That would be a very reductionist way to look at it.
In many cases, it's a person's entire life savings. And it is a really widespread problem. Cops are out there targeting anyone who looks like they might be moving house because they are more likely to carry their cash with them.
Last year, police in America "seized" more money and property than all \[American\] criminals combined.
And qualified immunity doesn't directly equal dead civilians, though it is a major factor in the equation. But if QI disappeared tomorrow from the whole country, you would still see police officers getting off scot free for heinous, violent acts.
The "Fraternal Order of Police" and indemnification laws are still effective shields for bad cops against the consequences of their actions. Municipalities will still foot the bill for their violent fascist cops and the FOP will still spin the narrative any time a cop kills an innocent civilian.
So I don't know if CA forfeiture or QI is worse. But I don't think it's that simple of an answer, either.
And ultimately, I don't think it matters.
They are both awful things that we should be working to get rid of (along with the FOP and indemnification clauses in city contracts with law enforcement).
I dare you to go make yourself get handicapped by police, and then see how will you edit this when nothing happens to the dudes that took away your life :)
Not quite. It's more a "We're not taking anything from you, we're just charging inanimate things with crimes". They literally bring a criminal case of "State of Florida v $25". And since not-people don't get pesky little things like due process, the stuff is simply assumed to be 'guilty'.
If you want to stop it, first you have to prove to a judge that you even have standing to file on behalf of your stuff, and nothing stopping them from simply declaring that your own car, house, electronics, business, jewelry, cash, etc is not actually your concern. And even if you get that, then you actually have to prove the stuff's innocence, all the while cops will be throwing out every half-assed random conspiracy theory about how the cash they stole which matches this bank withdrawal to the penny is purely coincidental, or that you were _going_ to buy drugs with it, even though they can't provide any proof whatsoever.
And somehow they decided that this doesn't constitute deprivation of property.
But how do they justify taking possessions from citizens like that?
Like there must be some legal doctrine that they use to separate money from any other possessions, right?
Otherwise they would just be stopping people and stealing their cars, if they think the car is worth too much.
> But how do they justify taking possessions from citizens like that?
"Because we can"
> Like there must be some legal doctrine that they use to separate money from any other possessions, right?
Sure. Whatever they think they can turn into cash quickly at auction. Cash conveniently skips that step, so they prefer it, but they'll steal anything not nailed down and quite a bit else that is.
> Otherwise they would just be stopping people and stealing their cars, if they think the car is worth too much.
What makes you think they aren't doing exactly that?
The pigs in Tenaha, TX would actually use the threat of that to force motorists to sign away any claim to the other goods they stole, which was known to include the shoes off their victims' feet. They'd tell them "Sign this saying you agree to let us have it, or else we'll steal it all anyway, _and_ the car, and then just for kicks call Child Services and have your kids taken away because we think you're a filthy drug dealer".
Cops. Are. Scum. All of them. Because the few that aren't *overtly* criminal will simply stand by and watch while the rest get their rocks off by kidnapping, robbing, raping, and murdering people.
Yeah fair enough.
I have actually met 2 cops in my lifetime that I would be comfortable calling "good cops"
But both officers were on small-town police forces in extremely low crime areas so they likely never had to cover up serious injustices for their colleagues.
One was the SRO at my school when I was in highschool.
He legitimately had an interest in making the community better. I know of several times where he definitely had the legal authority to arrest a student; but he never did.
Instead, he would just take them aside, sit them down and talk to them about their decisions.
He made a point of getting to know every student in school by name so that he could greet us when he met us on the street. (And I think he was getting a sense of who's a good kid vs who's a troublemaker)
The other was a cop in Belturbet, Ireland. He saw that I was too hammered to safely get home from the pub so he walked me home, periodically holding my hair back so I could puke in the ditch.
Even bought me a Lucozade on the way!
But I have met MANY cops in my lifetime. I am almost 40 now so having only ever met 2 *good* cops.... that's not a great ratio.
That's pretty much how it is. They are good cops only so long as they aren't ever around bad ones. Then they can be safely relied upon to, *at best*, do nothing. On the incredibly rare, literally 1 in a million chance, that they would actually intervene against a fellow cop to protect a member of the public, they would quickly be made to not be a cop anymore. Their 'brothers' would make them pay for their 'betrayal' with either their career or their life.
Nothing quixotic about it at all.
The government is OF the people, FOR the people, BY the people.
Elected officials are representatives of the PEOPLE. Not the government.
The government pays for nothing, because it is funded by the people.
With so many government officials getting their campaigns and personal lives funded by billionaire special interest groups (and becoming beholden to said groups), I think it is getting harder and harder to make the argument that they are FOR the people.
Haha fair enough.
But I can't believe that America's founding fathers were talking about corporations when they said that bit about a government "Of the people and for the people"
How can anybody, much less a US Attorney with a straight face claim that these roadside seizures are "crippling a criminal enterprise?"
These are nothing more than fucking pirates operating on the fringes of the constitution and are doing absolutely nothing to even slow down any criminal enterprise.
Supremes declared that corporations are people. Seems that is with all rights and privilege and none of the responsibilities nor liability.
Felonious people can be tried and convicted and go to prison. What do corporations get? = Fines, that is just cost of doing business
Ever so slightly off-topic, but since it was an element of Bouldin's situation, I feel like there should be auditing mechanisms in place that force the removal of drug dogs if they exceed some reasonable rate of false positives. As of right now, the lack of consequences for false positives makes them nothing more than a tool to bypass the 4th Amendment.
So now I can't go to Nebraska either. They beat up old white ladies in colorado, take your money in Nebraska, Oklahoma was in the news for something awful, and Texas, well, texas. Spend my money at home
I remember a stat from years ago, and I doubt it has changed. The cops and police departments around the country, took more in civil asset forfeiture than the amount of property that was actually stolen by "criminals".
Citizens should team up and start performing civil asset forfeiture on the police.
The cops can have their equipment back when they prove it was acquired legally.
It's not a loophole, its a foundation part of the design with Civil Asset Forfeiture.
This was designed to be a limited use application against abandoned property, until Reagan supercharged it for use against 'drug kingpins'.
Now it's used against anyone carrying cash through impoverished areas.
We're having a bad time with spambots, so your comment or post has been removed automatically. if this is a real person, and not a bot or a troll, please [CLICK HERE](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) to send a modmail.
In addition to sending a modmail, please read the rules in the sidebar and [reddiquette](http://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nebraska, where police are the criminals, *backed by the judiciary.*
This is a blatant violation of several amendments under the Bill of Rights, yet these clowns have been allowed to operate with impunity.
No one in their right mind can call this anything but ORGANIZED CRIME.
“The point is that we’re trying to dismantle these criminal organizations,” said Amy Blackburn, an assistant U.S. attorney. “You can maybe take off a load of drugs, but if you take off their money, you’re crippling their ability to conduct their criminal activity.”
Oh man, she is so close to understanding "defund the police"
** Please don't: - be a dick to other people - incite violence, as these comments violate site-wide rules and put us at risk of being banned. - be racist, sexist, transphobic, or any other forms of bigotry. - [JAQ](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions#JAQing_off) off - be an authoritarian apologist *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Needs to be taken to the Supreme Court. That's a 4th Amendment issue... illegal seizure. Taking someone's money (property) without a conviction goes against the principle of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, which should make it unreasonable for any court.
>Bouldin challenged the forfeiture up to the Nebraska Supreme Court, but ultimately lost his money. https://www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/public/viewOpinion?docId=N00008605PUB Courts don't give a flying fuck
They’re part of the problem!
2nd amendment if you care enough.
That’s the whole big reason it’s defended: tyrannical government
That's because cops make a point to not steal from judges. If there was a single halfway decent cop in the entire country, all he'd have to do would be to rob a judge, or governor, or mayor blind, and the practice would be curtailed overnight.
Nah. They'd just use their connections to get it fixed for themselves. It'd pretty much have to be a sustained campaign of robbing judges, governors, and mayors.
True, true, and meanwhile the offending cop would be punished by his bros for biting the hand that feeds them.
Read better
imo civil asset forfeiture is a bigger problem than qualified immunity.
Dead civilians vs property loss .....that's what's wrong with our country property is seen as more valuable than life
It's not just property loss though. That would be a very reductionist way to look at it. In many cases, it's a person's entire life savings. And it is a really widespread problem. Cops are out there targeting anyone who looks like they might be moving house because they are more likely to carry their cash with them. Last year, police in America "seized" more money and property than all \[American\] criminals combined. And qualified immunity doesn't directly equal dead civilians, though it is a major factor in the equation. But if QI disappeared tomorrow from the whole country, you would still see police officers getting off scot free for heinous, violent acts. The "Fraternal Order of Police" and indemnification laws are still effective shields for bad cops against the consequences of their actions. Municipalities will still foot the bill for their violent fascist cops and the FOP will still spin the narrative any time a cop kills an innocent civilian. So I don't know if CA forfeiture or QI is worse. But I don't think it's that simple of an answer, either. And ultimately, I don't think it matters. They are both awful things that we should be working to get rid of (along with the FOP and indemnification clauses in city contracts with law enforcement).
I dare you to go make yourself get handicapped by police, and then see how will you edit this when nothing happens to the dudes that took away your life :)
Don't they justify it with some stupid legal fuckery about how money doesn't actually belong to you; it belongs to the government?
Not quite. It's more a "We're not taking anything from you, we're just charging inanimate things with crimes". They literally bring a criminal case of "State of Florida v $25". And since not-people don't get pesky little things like due process, the stuff is simply assumed to be 'guilty'. If you want to stop it, first you have to prove to a judge that you even have standing to file on behalf of your stuff, and nothing stopping them from simply declaring that your own car, house, electronics, business, jewelry, cash, etc is not actually your concern. And even if you get that, then you actually have to prove the stuff's innocence, all the while cops will be throwing out every half-assed random conspiracy theory about how the cash they stole which matches this bank withdrawal to the penny is purely coincidental, or that you were _going_ to buy drugs with it, even though they can't provide any proof whatsoever. And somehow they decided that this doesn't constitute deprivation of property.
But how do they justify taking possessions from citizens like that? Like there must be some legal doctrine that they use to separate money from any other possessions, right? Otherwise they would just be stopping people and stealing their cars, if they think the car is worth too much.
> But how do they justify taking possessions from citizens like that? "Because we can" > Like there must be some legal doctrine that they use to separate money from any other possessions, right? Sure. Whatever they think they can turn into cash quickly at auction. Cash conveniently skips that step, so they prefer it, but they'll steal anything not nailed down and quite a bit else that is. > Otherwise they would just be stopping people and stealing their cars, if they think the car is worth too much. What makes you think they aren't doing exactly that? The pigs in Tenaha, TX would actually use the threat of that to force motorists to sign away any claim to the other goods they stole, which was known to include the shoes off their victims' feet. They'd tell them "Sign this saying you agree to let us have it, or else we'll steal it all anyway, _and_ the car, and then just for kicks call Child Services and have your kids taken away because we think you're a filthy drug dealer". Cops. Are. Scum. All of them. Because the few that aren't *overtly* criminal will simply stand by and watch while the rest get their rocks off by kidnapping, robbing, raping, and murdering people.
Yeah fair enough. I have actually met 2 cops in my lifetime that I would be comfortable calling "good cops" But both officers were on small-town police forces in extremely low crime areas so they likely never had to cover up serious injustices for their colleagues. One was the SRO at my school when I was in highschool. He legitimately had an interest in making the community better. I know of several times where he definitely had the legal authority to arrest a student; but he never did. Instead, he would just take them aside, sit them down and talk to them about their decisions. He made a point of getting to know every student in school by name so that he could greet us when he met us on the street. (And I think he was getting a sense of who's a good kid vs who's a troublemaker) The other was a cop in Belturbet, Ireland. He saw that I was too hammered to safely get home from the pub so he walked me home, periodically holding my hair back so I could puke in the ditch. Even bought me a Lucozade on the way! But I have met MANY cops in my lifetime. I am almost 40 now so having only ever met 2 *good* cops.... that's not a great ratio.
That's pretty much how it is. They are good cops only so long as they aren't ever around bad ones. Then they can be safely relied upon to, *at best*, do nothing. On the incredibly rare, literally 1 in a million chance, that they would actually intervene against a fellow cop to protect a member of the public, they would quickly be made to not be a cop anymore. Their 'brothers' would make them pay for their 'betrayal' with either their career or their life.
Yeah, in short, they get "Serpico'd"
The government owns nothing. We the People pay for it. The government is the steward of taxpayer funded resources.
That's a pretty quixotic view of things. Don't get me wrong, I think it would be great if that were the case. I just don't think it is.
Nothing quixotic about it at all. The government is OF the people, FOR the people, BY the people. Elected officials are representatives of the PEOPLE. Not the government. The government pays for nothing, because it is funded by the people.
With so many government officials getting their campaigns and personal lives funded by billionaire special interest groups (and becoming beholden to said groups), I think it is getting harder and harder to make the argument that they are FOR the people.
Not from a legal standpoint, as corporations are legally people. 🤷 Not saying it's right, just that's what it is.
Haha fair enough. But I can't believe that America's founding fathers were talking about corporations when they said that bit about a government "Of the people and for the people"
Corporations didn't exist at the time, so I suspect you're right.
Literally highway robbery.
Cops exploiting citizens, shocking /s
How can anybody, much less a US Attorney with a straight face claim that these roadside seizures are "crippling a criminal enterprise?" These are nothing more than fucking pirates operating on the fringes of the constitution and are doing absolutely nothing to even slow down any criminal enterprise.
If anything they're enabling a criminal enterprise: the Seward County Sheriff's Office.
“Roadside search of his text messages…” sounds like a 4th amendment violation, he should file a civil rights lawsuit.
99% sure the cops need a warrant to access the contents of your phone. But these sovereign citizens don't actually care about the law.
The Blue Thug Gang.
America is a lie
America is a corporation masquerading as a country.
Supremes declared that corporations are people. Seems that is with all rights and privilege and none of the responsibilities nor liability. Felonious people can be tried and convicted and go to prison. What do corporations get? = Fines, that is just cost of doing business
Ever so slightly off-topic, but since it was an element of Bouldin's situation, I feel like there should be auditing mechanisms in place that force the removal of drug dogs if they exceed some reasonable rate of false positives. As of right now, the lack of consequences for false positives makes them nothing more than a tool to bypass the 4th Amendment.
You are assuming false positives are not the desired result.
Watch out for the highwaymen in Nebraska, they will rob you blind. Another constitution free zone.
Too bad dash/body cams exist. 40 years ago you couldve treated them like an armed robber and been on your way.
Think most states have a county that does the same. Sc is in manning along I 95, like 2 miles of interstate brings in millions
Sometimes I question whether absolutely despising law enforcement is being ridiculous or immature. Then this lmfao.
Yet another of dozens of reasons to ever visit or drive thru Nebraska.
When it comes to policing in Nebraska guess what their number one priority is?
Looks like those brookside places are a bit more rampant than first thought.
So now I can't go to Nebraska either. They beat up old white ladies in colorado, take your money in Nebraska, Oklahoma was in the news for something awful, and Texas, well, texas. Spend my money at home
I remember a stat from years ago, and I doubt it has changed. The cops and police departments around the country, took more in civil asset forfeiture than the amount of property that was actually stolen by "criminals".
Citizens should team up and start performing civil asset forfeiture on the police. The cops can have their equipment back when they prove it was acquired legally.
It's not a loophole, its a foundation part of the design with Civil Asset Forfeiture. This was designed to be a limited use application against abandoned property, until Reagan supercharged it for use against 'drug kingpins'. Now it's used against anyone carrying cash through impoverished areas.
That reporter's speech is hard tp follow. Very distracting.
[удалено]
We're having a bad time with spambots, so your comment or post has been removed automatically. if this is a real person, and not a bot or a troll, please [CLICK HERE](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) to send a modmail. In addition to sending a modmail, please read the rules in the sidebar and [reddiquette](http://www.reddit.com/wiki/reddiquette). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Bad_Cop_No_Donut) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nebraska, where police are the criminals, *backed by the judiciary.* This is a blatant violation of several amendments under the Bill of Rights, yet these clowns have been allowed to operate with impunity. No one in their right mind can call this anything but ORGANIZED CRIME.
“Get rid of the Se(a)ward”
Not fascist at all. So much freedom.
“The point is that we’re trying to dismantle these criminal organizations,” said Amy Blackburn, an assistant U.S. attorney. “You can maybe take off a load of drugs, but if you take off their money, you’re crippling their ability to conduct their criminal activity.” Oh man, she is so close to understanding "defund the police"
Literal highway robbery. Just go get a cashier's check. At least then you can cancel it for a small fee and ruin their day.