FIFYOriginally Posted by Palmguy
Yes, I know that's essentially what you said, I just felt it bore clarifying.
FIFY
Yes, I know that's essentially what you said, I just felt it bore clarifying.
Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
“It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
Glenn Reynolds
My intention here is not to judge or denigrate forum members' feelings on this subject, which are deeply held. But the reality is that large minority of what the government does is sue people and take their shit. This can be the IRS, which rarely uses Federal courts to take enforcement action, but rather uses administrative courts. This is true with the DMV when they suspend licenses or impound cars. There are numerous examples of the EPA, OSHA, etc. The government depends on these processes for enforcement. There is rarely a criminal prosecution versus administrative action.
I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing. If the government needed a prosecution to punish you, they'll start doing it. Would you rather face a $15,000 administrative fine for driving your truck through a creek that you didn't know was protected, or face a $15,000 fine and 12 months in jail if the government was required to criminally prosecute you and attain a conviction in order to fine you? At least administratively you can fight the fine, and if you lose, bear the brunt of it. If you're facing a criminal prosecution, you need to think long and hard if you want to push it and go to trial, knowing that you'll get jail if you lose. I often feel that people are prosecuted and face long prison sentences for honest mistakes, where an administrative punishment might suffice. As a gun owner, I'm acutely aware of this. Should my Dad face jail time for following Google maps to the trap range, after he's routed near a school unbeknownst to him? Maybe losing his shotgun might be preferable?
This subject is much deeper than the simplified media portrayals.
I mean, no offense, but I think maybe not empowering the government to crush people for innocent mistakes might be the way to go. You're acting like the government is some unaccountable behemoth that cannot possibly be restrained, so we should be thankful that it only fines you and takes your stuff instead of taking your freedom.
I mean, that might be the reality, but it's not good. We should strive to have a government that isn't terrifying and destructive to citizens who are trying to comply with the law.
Sucks when some people one works with, who should understand what PC is, don't.
Editorial by Sen. Rand Paul:
http://rare.us/rare-politics/rare-li...m-on-its-head/
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
At one time I avoided I-10 through Louisiana when certain abuses were occurring. It has happened in the past and can occur again in the future even if it is the exception and not the rule. It's the exceptions in life that scare me.
What do ya'll think about this....
https://streamable.com/3dvge
Just a few notes (please correct me if I am wrong on the CA-specific stuff) - civil asset forfeiture in CA is in the tens of thousands? A citation in CA is a legal "arrest" therefore "evidence" can be taken in reference to prove guilt of that arrest.
What do you guys think about illegal hot dog vendors?
VDMSR.com
Chief Developer for V Development Group
Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.
^^^^ Bottom line.... as long as there is a violation of the law related to the assets being seized (check), AND, the accused has a fair and reasonable path to defending against the charge AND can recover the seized assets if found not guilty/related charges dropped.
A guy getting stopped for speeding should not have his $10,000 seized with no violation/charge reasonably connected to the cash.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
Yes, property and money has been returned...many times. The government can't keep it without either entering into a settlement (in civil cases) or prevailing in court. And the burden is on the government to prove the link between the property and the crime - in federal cases, at least.
I think the administrative state is a real problem. That's probably a separate discussion, though. In the federal system, you almost always have access to courts as a remedy, not just a administrative body. Even if you're forced through an admin judge, if you get a bad result, it's appeallable to a district court.
Reply With Quote