Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here's some wikipedia articles for you:

I fixed the quotation for you so others could understand your question.

Wiki is cute. There have to be real world examples of this for you to be this upset about it. I understand how the process works. I also understand that there are ways for suspects to get their property back. The most effective way is to prove the property was not related to criminal activity. That’s easy for innocent people to do.

Anonymous wrote:here's some wikipedia articles for you:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

What property is being seized and why? This is the second time this wacky comment has come up.

NP. Not sure if it's "piracy," but forfeiture laws were significantly abused in the past by LE. If you want to seize property, the burden of proof should be on the person seizing it, not the owner of the property.

What property? Give me a scenario and the resulting property seizure.

DP, but valuables in safety deposit boxes is a huge one.
vehicles
homes
boats
cash (read all the stories of little old ladies and men who cash out their savings account, then unknowlingly try to board a public flight with the cash and have it seized due to "suspicious behaviors" and "criminal activity".

here's some wikipedia articles for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_forfeiture_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

I’d appreciate a link to a story about this.

Anonymous wrote:I'm against the militarization of law enforcement. There is no reason for police to have military grade vehicles, drones, and weaponry. Police are there to enforce the laws, not subdue the population.

Anonymous wrote: How does a “military grade” vehicle threaten your safety? They are bullet proof and utilized for high risk situations.

My 12 year old nephew has a drone. Millions of people have drones. It’s not like police drones carry weapons.

Why wouldn’t police have guns to protect themselves?

Anonymous wrote:Most citizens are completely inept with firearms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with many police is they don't like the public having firearms. Everytime they contact with the public in a stop or something, they get all scared and wussy and trigger happy nervous.

They "disarm" you for "their safety". What about disarming the cops for "our safety"?? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Cops should be fired and jailed on the spot for doing power trip moves like that.

Police don’t have a problem with legal firearms. They need to verify that, though. Officers are empowered to remove you from your vehicle for their safety. If you have a gun let them know and they’ll remove it, clear it, and make it safe. If you reach for it things will go differently. Most police are pro-gun. Your disarming the cops statement is irrational. I’m confused by the fired and jailed comment as well.

That's for sure.

Anonymous wrote:
BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAA NEVER tell a cop you have a firearm. That's a good way to get shot by them, either on purpose or accidentally.

Most cops are completely inept with firearms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

What property is being seized and why? This is the second time this wacky comment has come up.

NP. Not sure if it's "piracy," but forfeiture laws were significantly abused in the past by LE. If you want to seize property, the burden of proof should be on the person seizing it, not the owner of the property.

What property? Give me a scenario and the resulting property seizure.

DP, but valuables in safety deposit boxes is a huge one.
vehicles
homes
boats
cash (read all the stories of little old ladies and men who cash out their savings account, then unknowlingly try to board a public flight with the cash and have it seized due to "suspicious behaviors" and "criminal activity".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with many police is they don't like the public having firearms. Everytime they contact with the public in a stop or something, they get all scared and wussy and trigger happy nervous.

They "disarm" you for "their safety". What about disarming the cops for "our safety"?? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Cops should be fired and jailed on the spot for doing power trip moves like that.

Police don’t have a problem with legal firearms. They need to verify that, though. Officers are empowered to remove you from your vehicle for their safety. If you have a gun let them know and they’ll remove it, clear it, and make it safe. If you reach for it things will go differently. Most police are pro-gun. Your disarming the cops statement is irrational. I’m confused by the fired and jailed comment as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem with many police is they don't like the public having firearms. Everytime they contact with the public in a stop or something, they get all scared and wussy and trigger happy nervous.

They "disarm" you for "their safety". What about disarming the cops for "our safety"?? What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Cops should be fired and jailed on the spot for doing power trip moves like that.

Police don’t have a problem with legal firearms. They need to verify that, though. Officers are empowered to remove you from your vehicle for their safety. If you have a gun let them know and they’ll remove it, clear it, and make it safe. If you reach for it things will go differently. Most police are pro-gun. Your disarming the cops statement is irrational. I’m confused by the fired and jailed comment as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

What property is being seized and why? This is the second time this wacky comment has come up.

NP. Not sure if it's "piracy," but forfeiture laws were significantly abused in the past by LE. If you want to seize property, the burden of proof should be on the person seizing it, not the owner of the property.

What property? Give me a scenario and the resulting property seizure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There appears to be a contingent of posters here that dislike federal and local law enforcement. I’m wondering if people’s reasoning is similar or if there are several distinct opinions. I’ve seen several “defund” posts and even one calling for the death penalty for ICE agents. Maybe it’s only one or two posters. I’ll be interested to see your replies.

Are you an idiot?

ICE officers are wearing masks they are criminals. They are not trained; they are racist garbage.

Police officers are not bad as a whole only the Blue Line ones are the idiots. Sure lets support the guy who stole from NY 9/11 first responders fund!!!! Let's support the guy taking away your overtime!

NP.

It is you who is the idiot, PP.

ICE is doing great work; they are keeping us safe and helping secure the border. The ONLY reason they need masks is prevent idiot-weirdos like you from doxxing them and threatening their families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seizure of properties like they do is basically just piracy.

What property is being seized and why? This is the second time this wacky comment has come up.

NP. Not sure if it's "piracy," but forfeiture laws were significantly abused in the past by LE. If you want to seize property, the burden of proof should be on the person seizing it, not the owner of the property.