Is freedom a simple matter of drafting a lofty document about respecting the rights of citizens?
Alas, no.
Our Constitution does that, as does Turkey’s and, for that matter, so did the now-defunct Soviet Constitution. Obviously, vigilance is also required. Keeping powerful government agencies respectful of the law — our liberties — and, when not, fully accountable for transgressions, is crucial.
That necessary vigilance is lacking here in America, today.
Your local police — the guys and gals who might respond if, heaven forbid, your home were broken into, or come upon your spouse broken down on a dark, rainy highway — are being encouraged to take people’s stuff … for “profit.”
It’s called civil asset forfeiture. This “legal” ability to stop people and snatch their money (or car or what-have-you) without ever charging anyone with a crime forces victims to hire a lawyer to sue the government to prove their stuff is innocent.
Last Friday, I heralded a new Institute for Justice report on the growth of this dangerous practice of official police thievery. At Townhall on Sunday, I pointed out that even when reforms are enacted at the state and local level, federal law enforcement still facilitates civil forfeiture. The Feds encourage locals to continue taking stuff through a federal program known as “equitable stealing.”
No, my bad, it’s actually called “equitable sharing.”
But it’s the same thing, just with the Feds and locals splitting the loot.
We need new laws at the federal, state and local level that abolish forfeiture without a criminal conviction. If our “leaders” won’t act, we can petition at the local level to end this pernicious policy, forbidding any involvement with the Feds.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
2 replies on “Equitable Stealing?”
How sad, it is the division of government which is supposedly constrained by the Constitution and which was to protect our rights which is the primary aggressor.
Doublethink in spades!
Could a local initiative actually prevent a local police department from participating in civil asset forfeiture, or does federal law override that?