Florida's Civil Asset Forfeiture Reforms Haven't Stopped the Shakedowns
Despite civil asset forfeiture reforms in Florida, police are still finding ways to take people's stuff.
On a May day in 2015, a task force of Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents and Miami-Dade Police Department officers raided Miladis Salgado's suburban Miami home and seized $15,000 in cash that they found in her closet.
The DEA agents were acting on a tip from a confidential informant that Salgado's estranged husband was laundering drug money.
The cash in Salgado's closet was not drug proceeds, however. It was money that Salgado, who worked at a duty-free store in the Miami airport, had been saving up for her daughter's quinceañera, an important coming-of-age 15th birthday party. Salgado had been planning to book a banquet hall, D.J., and -photographer. Suddenly bereft of her savings, she had to cancel the party.
It took two years for Salgado to get her money back, even after a DEA agent admitted in a deposition that there was no connection between her cash and the alleged criminal activity. In the meantime, Florida passed a law reforming the state's civil asset forfeiture process, which allows law enforcement to seize property—cash, cars, houses—even when the owner isn't convicted of a crime. The 2016 law raised the burden of proof for forfeiting property and now requires at least an arrest before most property can be forfeited.
But despite tightening the rules for when police can keep seized property, Florida remains one of the most prolific practitioners of civil forfeiture. The Sunshine State took in more revenue through forfeitures than any other state in 2018, according to a survey by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm. Local and state police can evade the new restrictions by working with the federal government, just like the Miami-Dade police did in Salgado's case. In return for calling in the feds, they get a cut of the proceeds.
"The federal government is literally paying state and local police to circumvent state law," says Justin Pearson, managing attorney for the Institute for Justice's Florida office. "That's not the way things are supposed to work."
'It Was Really the Wild West'
State Sen. Jeff Brandes (R–St. Petersburg), who sponsored the 2016 law, says that before its passage, "it was really the wild west" in Florida when it came to asset forfeiture. "You had some crazy stories where there were police departments with 10 members, and they'd have three people whose basically full-time job was asset forfeiture."
Florida, like most other states at the time, had few protections for innocent property owners and little oversight of police departments' activities. This was not without consequences.
In 2012, the Justice Department demanded that the police department in Bal Harbour, Florida—population 2,500—return $4 million in forfeited assets after audits showed the department had been misusing funds for lavish expenses, vehicles, payouts to snitches, and first-class travel. A follow-up Miami Herald investigation found the Bal Harbour police had been running a task force investigating money laundering by international drug cartels, in which task force members posed as money launderers, ostensibly to learn more about cartel networks. Over the course of the three-year investigation, the task force laundered $56 million for drug cartels through undercover police bank accounts, and took $1.7 million for themselves as commission. The Bal Harbour police made zero arrests or major drug seizures as a result of the investigation, and even when accounting for federal seizures based on tips from the task force, the task force was still funneling far more money to drug cartels than it was stopping. The Herald obtained confidential records showing that Bal Harbour officers later withdrew hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash from those accounts, and, because of lax oversight, there were no records showing where the money went.
In 2014, the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel published a report about how police in the suburb of Sunrise, Florida—population 90,000 at the time—raked in millions by using well-paid snitches to lure cocaine buyers into town from around the country, meeting them at a local TGI Fridays, and seizing their cash. Despite having a relatively small police force, Sunrise was taking in more forfeiture revenue than any other city in Palm Beach or Broward counties. The Sun-Sentinel found that a dozen members of the Sunrise Police Department's vice squad had each made hundreds of thousands of dollars in overtime pay through the stings.
The 2016 reforms raised the evidentiary standard for forfeitures from "clear and convincing" to "beyond reasonable doubt," meaning prosecutors must meet the same burden of proof required in criminal cases before police are allowed to keep seized property. The law also required an arrest before the seizure of most property (although notably not cash); raised the attorney fees awarded to owners to $2,000 when a court finds there was no probable cause for the seizure; adopted new transparency requirements for law enforcement agencies; raised the filing fee the government has to pay to initiate forfeiture actions to $1,000; and required agencies to post a $1,500 bond, payable to owners who win their property back.
Finally, Florida's new law requires any local police department that takes in at least $15,000 in a fiscal year via the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act to donate at least 25 percent of the proceeds to community programs, such as drug prevention, youth sports, and neighborhood safety initiatives.
A Reason review of state forfeiture data showed law enforcement donating to a wide variety of causes. In 2018, for example, the Escambia County Sheriff's Office donated forfeiture revenues to, among other organizations, Pensacola Habitat for Humanity and Christian Surfers, an evangelical group whose mission is to spread the good word while shredding waves. Nonetheless, an investigation of state data conducted by the Florida news outlet ABC7 reported in 2020 that, "overall, agencies are falling short of that donation requirement."
'It Shouldn't Matter Whether It's Profitable'
While the new rules curb some of the pettiest examples of forfeiture abuse, they leave open an avenue for agencies to get around the requirements.
"What we're finding now is because of the hurdles we've placed in state law that requires at least an arrest, they're now utilizing federal law more," Brandes says. "It's jurisdiction -shopping."
Under the Justice Department's equitable sharing program, federal authorities may "adopt" state and local civil asset forfeiture cases and pursue them at the federal level. Local police departments who partner with the feds get to keep up to 80 percent of the forfeiture revenue, while the rest goes into the equitable sharing pool and is distributed among partner departments around the country. Such cases proceed under federal law and guidelines, rather than the state's.
(On the upside, participating in the Justice Department's Equitable Sharing program does come with strict controls on how revenues can be used, which is what got the Bal Harbour Police Department in trouble.)
In 2015, reacting to calls for policing reform, the Barack Obama administration limited when federal law enforcement could adopt asset forfeiture cases. But the Donald Trump administration, which touted itself as a stalwart friend of law enforcement, rescinded that memo in 2017, opening up the forfeiture spigot again. The Joe Biden administration has not re-instated the Obama-era directive, despite the lengthy criminal justice plank in the Biden campaign's platform, which included the principle that "no one should be profiteering off of our criminal justice system."
Law enforcement groups say asset forfeiture is a crucial tool to disrupt organized crime, such as drug trafficking, by targeting its illicit proceeds. The Florida Sheriff's Association did not respond to a request for comment, but the Florida Police Chiefs Association says on its website that the organization "opposes any legislation that abolishes or unreasonably restricts a law enforcement agency from implementing a properly managed civil asset forfeiture program."
The Institute for Justice gave Florida a grade of C in its recent survey of asset forfeiture laws across the country, which is an improvement over the state's D+ grade in the 2015 survey. The report cited Florida's higher burden of proof and extra protections for innocent owners but dinged it for the large financial incentive police still have to go after assets.
The report showed that Florida has the highest average dollar value for forfeitures: $4,500. This is likely a result of the raised filing fee for law enforcement seeking to seize property as well as the $1,500 bond requirement. Pearson says the extra bond requirement and higher filing fee have deterred petty seizures. "We've seen a huge drop off in forfeitures of less than $2,500, because it just doesn't make sense financially for the police to pursue them," Pearson says. "Of course, this shows that forfeiture is not about fighting crime, right? Because if you're trying to stop a crime, it shouldn't matter whether it's profitable."
Forfeiture cases often don't proceed to trial. Instead, police departments frequently cut settlement deals with property owners, agreeing to drop the case and return some (but not all) of the property.
Negotiated settlements accounted for $18.9 million of the $47.8 million that Florida law enforcement seized, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement's 2018–2019 asset forfeiture report. Of the 4,429 forfeiture cases initiated in fiscal year 2018, nearly a third were resolved through settlements, according to state data.
'They Want the Money'
Settling cases in this manner raises the question of exactly how departments determine which percentage of a pile of cash is an instrument of crime and which is not. After all, if the money isn't the fruit of criminal activity, then the police have no reason to hold on to any of it—in which case there are less polite ways to describe what's going on.
"It's just a shakedown," Pearson says. "Most people can't afford to wait two years to get part of their money back, because they have bills to pay. So they take the deal, and I can tell you, they will never trust law enforcement again."
Local news outlet WTSP reported in 2015 on the case of Tampa woman Antoinette Poskitt, whose 2011 Dodge Journey was seized by the Florida Highway Patrol after her boyfriend was arrested for a traffic violation. The agency offered to return the vehicle and drop a misdemeanor charge against Poskitt for allowing an unauthorized person to drive it…for $9,000.
Such settlements are not unusual around the rest of the country, either. Wayne County, Michigan, has been known to seize hundreds of cars a year without filing charges against the owners. The state attorney's office then offered owners a $900 (plus towing and storage) "settlement" to retrieve their car without going to court.
Although petty seizures have been reduced in Florida thanks to the 2016 reforms, abusive cases involving larger amounts of cash have continued to make the news. In 2018, Miami-Dade police were forced to return $20,000 in cash that the department had seized from Lizmixell Batista, a dancer at the local Cheetah Gentlemen's Club, and her husband, Ras Cates. The two were arrested following a traffic stop after police allegedly smelled marijuana in their car. A subsequent search turned up six guns, several large bottles of what cops suspected to be codeine cough syrup, and the large amount of cash.
Prosecutors dropped the charges against the couple when body-cam footage showed police didn't have permission to search the couple's trunk. The guns were all legally owned, and Batista had explained to officers why, given her profession, she would be carrying large amounts of cash. Nevertheless, the department initiated a forfeiture case against the money.
"I felt that the glitter on the seized cash was compelling evidence," defense lawyer Jude Faccidomo told the Miami Herald, "but apparently the police department disagreed."
For Faccidomo, the 2016 law hasn't changed the nature of his work much. "My feeling on the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act is that it is too broadly construed," he says. "It is ripe for abuse and oftentime leads to essentially legalized theft by law enforcement."
The raised attorney fees "do not cover the fees for representation by any stretch of the imagination," Faccidomo says. "There's no real threat there to law enforcement that they're going to get dinged with a significant bill from the attorney if they proceed on a frivolous seizure."
And while Florida law now requires an arrest before most property can be forfeited, that protection doesn't apply to cash—which is what most cops are really after anyway. "The municipalities and law enforcement are primarily interested in liquid currency," Faccidomo says. "They don't want to take your pickup truck, because then they've got a truck that they need to liquidate. They want the money."
'The Odor of Narcotics'
One place where Florida police have found a lucrative well of forfeiture cash is airports.
In 2019, Vice reported that the Broward County Sheriff's Office had a habit of seizing cash from travelers at Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport based on the alleged odor of marijuana and suspicious activity, such as one-way tickets or short turnarounds to and from California cities. In the three years prior to its report, Vice found that the agency had seized more than $189,000 from travelers.
"In every one of the 16 recent complaints, the Broward County Sheriff's Office alleges cops approached individuals seemingly at random, that their belongings smelled like cannabis, that they had purchased one-way plane tickets with a final destination in a California city on the same day or a few days earlier, that a police K-9 detected the odor of narcotics on the money they carried, and that they provided untruthful and evasive answers as to the source of their funds and the reasons why they were traveling to the Golden State," the outlet reported.
One of those cases was Curtis Simmons, who said he was printing out his boarding pass when he was surrounded by Broward County detectives. The officers seized roughly $11,000 in cash that Simmons said he intended to buy a Rolex watch with, accusing him of being involved in drug trafficking.
"It was embarrassing," Simmons told Vice. "It seemed like they profiled me because they thought that [drug dealing] was the only way a black person could have that much money."
Vice found that just three people stopped by the task force had been arrested for drug possession the day they were stopped, and none had been charged with a drug-trafficking crime.
There's nothing illegal about flying domestically with large amounts of cash, but federal and local narcotics agents, not just in Florida but around the country, use mere suspicion to seize travelers' money, forcing them to fight in court to get it back. The Institute for Justice is currently litigating a class-action lawsuit against the DEA and Transportation Security Administration on behalf of a Tampa woman, Stacy Jones, who had $43,000 in cash seized by federal authorities at an airport in North Carolina. The DEA returned the money after the Institute for Justice challenged the seizure.
"I worked hard for this money and was intending to use it for a down payment on a house," Jones said in a press release. "It's wrong that the government treats people like criminals even though they are doing something perfectly legal. It needs to stop."
'We Don't Have It Anymore'
The Institute for Justice says there's still much room for improvement in Florida's forfeiture laws. It recommends ending civil forfeiture altogether, as three other states have done. Short of that, it suggests directing all forfeiture proceeds to non–law enforcement funds, to eliminate perverse profit incentives, and preventing state and local agencies from using the equitable sharing program to circumvent state law.
While Florida's reforms appear to have improved asset forfeiture in general, strange cases still pop up. Last March, a Florida appeals court ruled that a man named Billy Ray Shirah deserved his day in forfeiture court. The Bay County Sheriff's Office (BCSO) had seized Shirah's 75-inch television and Playstation 4 while executing a drug search warrant on his father.
The sheriff's office initially denied taking the property. In a later court hearing, though, the sheriff's office admitted that it had once had Shirah's television and PS4. Unfortunately, it said, they had been mislaid.
"The bottom line is, we did have the property, and we don't have it anymore," a representative of the BCSO told the court, according to a transcript of the hearing.
"What happened to it?" the judge asked.
"I do not know."
One wonders where a 75-inch television could have disappeared to. Such mysteries likely won't be solved until there's more oversight of asset forfeiture in Florida.
As for Miladis Salgado, she eventually got her money back, although by that time her daughter's birthday had long since passed. The government refused to pay attorney fees for her lengthy legal battle.
"Miladis' case is over, but she was never made whole," Pearson says. "She did nothing wrong, but the government was able to game the system to avoid responsibility for the harm it caused. And her daughter's quinceañera will never happen."
This article originally appeared in print under the headline "'It's Just a Shakedown'."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
the sheriff’s office admitted that it had once had Shirah’s television and PS4. Unfortunately, it said, they had been mislaid.
“The bottom line is, we did have the property, and we don’t have it anymore,” a representative of the BCSO told the court
Nobody thought to check the den in the sheriff’s basement? I bet a lot of mislaid stuff was stored there and forgotten.
Single Mom Makes $89,844/Yr in Her Spare Time on The Computer Without Selling Anything.JHG you can bring from $5000-$8000 of extra income every month. working at home for 4 hours a day, and earning could be even bigger.
The potential with this is endless… Visit Here
You know, even if someone wanted to “de-fund” the police, it seems they do have other ways to keep their operations profitable…..
Yes…https://www.eugene-or.gov/4508/CAHOOTS
Damn, if they just go and brazenly name their program CAHOOTS, what chance do we ever have? No wonder government employees wear masks now!
I don’t care what the name is, if it saves money and saves lives.
Whether it saves lives and money irrelevant when that’s just the type of “non law enforcement” charity that the cops will push to have forfeiture dollars go to.
And even when they haven’t been partnering with an org for 30 years like the above, they will advise their friend and family to get hired on at the orgs where the forfeiture money is headed.
The best thing to do is end forfeiture altogether. It’s fucking ridiculous to think that humans can be honest around ill gotten gains.
CAHOOTS Diverts 5-8% of Calls from Police in Eugene, Or.
If not for CAHOOTS, an officer would be dispatched to handle the situation. Some of the CAHOOTS calls are a joint response, or CAHOOTS is summoned to a police or fire call after it is determined their services are a better match to resolve the situation. However, CAHOOTS remains a primary responder for many calls providing a valuable and needed resource to the community. It has saved them $Millions.
Lysander Spooner’s ghost explains that every day, in more than one language. Yet the mindless still vote looter, not libertarian.
It’s truly remarkable how quiet things are when all the numerous Reason staff sockpuppets get the weekend off from trolling and gaslighting.
It’s probably just a matter of time until the comments get disabled permanently. You know many of the staffers have probably been begging for that for years.
There’s nothing worse than having your lazy assemblage of tweets and peer signaling eviscerated in the comments.
Thank goodness Mike, Shrike, Sarc and Jeff are here to defend their honor.
They must have organized a half million dollar air bnb together.
Florida Man vs The Man.
Oh wow. I cannot wait until the Koch / Reason open borders agenda imports enough Democratic voters to transform the entire country into California.
Gavin Newsom says he’ll use Texas abortion law tactics to go after assault rifle, ghost gun makers
#LibertariansForGunSense
#LibertariansFor50Californias
So if a Californian kills a baby with a ghost gun or assault rifle after the first trimester, they will be vulnerable to a penaltax?
Right. You can’t let the Second Amendment stand. The commies might get frightened and nuke us just to stay on the safe side. And you can’t let women cut back on population growth, or let cops stop robbing and shooting people over plant leaves… that’d be anarchy!
The problem is that too many people don’t know what “well regulated” means, and also what “militia” means.
Home cash earning job to earns more than $500 per day. getting paid weekly more than $3.5k or more simply doing easy work online. no special skills required for this job and regular earning from this are just awesome.start to finish Check The Details====> Click Here<b
If only that money hadn’t been dressed so provocatively. I mean, c’mon, you know that cash was just begging to be seized like that.
In other news, if you don’t know that John Stossel is suing Facebook for defamation for calling him a liar in a “Factcheck” and that Facebook’s response is to claim that their Factchecks are not in fact fact checks but merely an opinion piece and therefore not subject to defamation speech laws, you really should check it out. Reminds me of back when Wrestlemania came to Madison Square Garden and New York said they had to be sanctioned by the state to put on a sporting event and Wrestlemania was forced to argue that wrasslin’ was not actually a sport, that it was scripted entertainment, that the “fights” were fake.
Factchecks are not in fact fact checks but merely an opinion piece and therefore not subject to defamation speech laws, you really should check it out.
Muh private company’s special protections. All the editorializing and none of the liability.
But don’t dare say that it isn’t right, because that means you want to destroy comment sections or something, there’s no such thing as amendments and it’s all or nothing.
ThErE wAs No InTeRnEt bEfOrE S2301!reeee
destroy comment sections
What’s the down side?
Libertarians even more lonely?
Without “factchecks” we would be in a mess. Popular idiots would rule the world with “fact checks are not in fact fact checks”. The stable genius has been going at it for 6 years with his “fake news” as a response for anything he didn’t understand, which is literally almost everything since he didn’t read his PDBs. Insane websites are popping up daily which are based on no facts, just whatever they can conjure up that day.
“Gavin Newsom says he’ll use Texas abortion law tactics to go after assault rifle, ghost gun makers.”
Which goes to show that California lawmakers are just as myopic as those in Texas. Using this tactic, there is almost nothing for which a State legislature couldn’t authorize someone to sue over, including otherwise legal drugs, booze, or hell, even the kind of car one drives or the brand of athletic shoe one wears.
Difficulty is that gun ownership is explicitly protected by the constitution.
Does not matter, Jesse. What Newsom is talking about is not firearms, but parts — which could be anything from a trigger assembly to a gun-sight to a scope to a cleaning rod. Nobody anywhere would be safe from civil suits based on whatever the government doesn’t “take a cotton to.”
And the USSC has already stated limiting production of hand guns is an attack on the right to bear arms.
California is free to try but they would be far more open to negation than the Texas law due to current court precedence.
There is not a nebulous term surrounding guns, their manufacturing, or their sale unlike the wording for “viability” with abortion.
Again, Jesse, firearms don’t NEED to be “outlawed” in anyway by the State — just the parts. This is what Newsom is talking about. All that has to be done is to pass a law as in Texas, which would specifically authorize CIVIL lawsuits, thus making it, as a matter of practicality, unable for just about anyone to purchase gun parts, since doing such could open themselves up to potential civil lawsuit.
Since only the lower is considered to be a firearm, allow lowers to be sold and outlaw the other parts. Clever.
But the supporters of this law said this cannot happen, so it won’t happen. To acknowledge this would mean questioning the Texas law, which isn’t allowed because Republicans wrote it and it outlaws abortion.
Short-term thinking strikes again!
You are so fucking worthless. Some of us go beyond politics and team based analysis shitbag. Only you seem to care what team is saying what.
Very soon now, private parties (both left and right) will be able to SUE you for NOT worshipping Government Almighty in JUST the Right Way (or JUST the Left Way)!!! (BOTH will happen, I am sure of it, and sure of shit as well!)
(It is a PRIVATE party suing you, NOT Government Almighty Itself, so QUIT yer whining, bitching, and crying, already!!!)
I addressed the parts… why did you skip over the note on manufacturing? Here is Prof Turley with more.
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/12/12/it-wont-work-newsom-calls-for-gun-ban-modeled-on-texas-abortion-law/#more-181706
Youre imagining ghosts right now.
Jesse:
Here is the reality in CA:
There is a whole list of handguns, (and I don’t mean those defined as “assault weapons”), which cannot be legally purchased or transferred in CA because of rather arbitrary and meaningless “safety” protocols, yet are perfectly legal in other States. Most semi-auto Ruger pistols fall in this category.
Manufacturing and purchasing are two separate things.
And, I never underestimate the “creativity” or stupidity of CA lawmakers. 🙂
No. Manufacturing and purchasing are inherently ingrained. These cases have gone to the USSC. There is no nebulous idea of viability with guns like there is with abortion. Guns are also fundamentally written and protected by the USSC. The two subjects are not the same.
Also remember Casey allows restrictions on abortion after viability. Restrictions on guns to the point of banning are not allowed based on Heller and others.
Do we know the name of the person who came up with this tactic in the first place?
Looking for advice?
“Do we know the name of the person who came up with this tactic in the first place?”
I don’t, But it’s safe to bet she/he/or other was a lawyer. Shakespeare was right. Again.
Fairly safe assumption.
Hey Dee, how about you fuck off.
^ This
Name? Who cares? Party is what matters. If the original person was a Republican then the tactic is awesome. If the person was a Democrat then this tactic must be stopped.
And more projection from sarcasmic as usual
Well. Attempted projection as a strawman.
But sarcasmic swears he’s not a Democrat, just ask him.
He and his white knighting lover are both libertarian.
Just curiosity.
As far as I know, we still don’t know who the cynical-ass genius was who came up with, “USA PATRIOT”. If I recall correctly, John Yoo is suspected of being the asshole that came up with it.
Had to be progressives. Republicans are champions of freedom who never do anything authoritarian or totalitarian.
Not a lefty and only talks ideas.
He swears he isn’t Jesse. Just ask him, he’ll tell you all about it.
Was probably Al Gore then.
Wrong. The supporters of the Texas abortion law said that not only is the tactic used already (which means it doesn’t matter), but it won’t be used on gun owners. So whoever said that is full of crap.
Cite?
https://www.vox.com/2021/12/12/22830625/newsom-california-guns-texas-abortion-law-supreme-court
How California plans to copy Texas abortion tactics for gun control
JesseBahnFuhrer, no doubt, will chime in with a hearty “what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander!”
Some idjits NEVER learn “tit for tat”, or, what I bless today, will be used against me tomorrow! Utter idjits! And arrogant morons to boot!
No, the point is it won’t work. The Texas law chills the operation of nationally funded baby butcheries and the decisions of conflicted women. The hypothetical California gun ban will not chill any existing gun owners, many of whom would relish the opportunity to be test cases to continue moving constitutional law in a pro-freedom direction. All they will do is what the screeching leftists should have done with the Texas act:
1) Get sued under the act
2) assert an affirmative defense that the act’s cause of action is unconstitutional.
3) win on appeal
Except for #3 for the lefties, in due course.
So it’s all about who, not what.
You are such a leftist child at this point. This is what you call arguing ideas huh.
We’ve reached the point where about 90% of sarc’s posts are the exact same thing.
Every fucking article, every fucking topic, the same fucking post. Such a pathetic, broken man sarc has become.
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank You! -Reason Staff
That’s the whole point! German conservatives wanted to muzzle the press and gas the commies and jews. German commies wanted to tax the nazis and melt down church gold to fight poverty. Hitler told them “you’re both right!” The Kleptocracy won… until May of 1945.
Wouldn’t be surprised if he also attempted to use it to ban petrol powered vehicles.
“Wouldn’t be surprised if he also attempted to use it to ban petrol powered vehicles.”
He doesn’t have to “ban them,” and probably, legally, couldn’t ban possession. But such a law would make impossible for anyone to own one. Imagine being hit with fifteen lawsuits from each of your “woke” neighbors?
Gas vehicles are on the way out anyway. Federal law requires manufacturers to keep increasing the mpg of their fleet, and the number will eventually reach zero. Which means all electric.
They won’t ban gas powered cars. They’ll ban the sale, manufacture and importation. So you can still own them. You just can’t buy them.
I meant infinity, not zero. Duh-oh!
Increasing the mpg means making the cars more dangerous, killing off their evil, selfish owners.
That’s why Ford no longer sells the Crown Vic. They had to drop it to raise the fleet’s average fuel economy.
Plus people stopped wanting to drive boats.
Boats with a big ass V8. Those things fucking move. That’s why the cops liked them.
He already has, effective in 2035. (Even though he will be long retired and cashing his hefty pension checks by then.) Who needs a legislature, or term limits, or constitutional restraint?
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/governor-newsom-announces-california-will-phase-out-gasoline-powered-cars-drastically-reduce-demand-for-fossil-fuel-in-californias-fight-against-climate-change/
Governor Gavin Newsom today announced that he will aggressively move the state further away from its reliance on climate change-causing fossil fuels while retaining and creating jobs and spurring economic growth – he issued an executive order requiring sales of all new passenger vehicles to be zero-emission by 2035 and additional measures to eliminate harmful emissions from the transportation sector.
Aka Operation Brownout
Plus it will create jobs — in the rental truck business, most likely. For people moving out faster.
The cash in Salgado’s closet was not drug proceeds, however. It was money that Salgado, who worked at a duty-free store in the Miami airport, had been saving up for her daughter’s quinceañera, an important coming-of-age 15th birthday party. Salgado had been planning to book a banquet hall, D.J., and -photographer. Suddenly bereft of her savings, she had to cancel the party…. It took two years for Salgado to get her money back…
On the bright side, by the time she could afford the party, her daughter was legal.
If she bought a plane ticket to Mexico for her daughter for a nature hike, her daughter would be eligible for a $450,000 gift.
In 2015, reacting to calls for policing reform, the Barack Obama administration limited when federal law enforcement could adopt asset forfeiture cases. But the Donald Trump administration, which touted itself as a stalwart friend of law enforcement, rescinded that memo in 2017, opening up the forfeiture spigot again. The Joe Biden administration has not re-instated the Obama-era directive, despite the lengthy criminal justice plank in the Biden campaign’s platform, which included the principle that “no one should be profiteering off of our criminal justice system.”
Way to go Joe! Wouldn’t want him to re-instate an Obama directive. Good job keeping Trump policy!
Youre such a retarded shit. The memo had no backing legally speaking, it was an EO.
Instead trump was working with lawmakers to make forfeiture illegal.
http://www.cfegov.org/2019/08/08/president-trump-signs-a-new-law-stopping-asset-forfeiture-abuse-by-the-irs/
God damn you are fucking retarded.
Dishonest fucking retard. I remember explaining that (complete with links) to sarcasmic before, and then he bitched that he was misunderstood.
And yet here he is pulling the same shit again.
It is simply pathetic at this point on his part. He keeps reinforcing how awful he is in argumentation as he impresses his leftist friends here adopting all of their fallacies while crying he is a victim. I’m actually close to muting someone for the first time.
He’s good at that.
And you two are great at being ignorant pieces of shit.
Funny though, conservatives never give him credit when he continues Trump’s trade war, when he turns away immigrants, and when he leaves Trump executive orders in place.
Or all those things wrong now that Biden is doing them?
And here he again shows his lack of information or logic capabilities as he doesn’t even bother to look at differences in policy or reasoning. He just knows he has to attack conservatives and trump at the expense of whatever credibility he thought he ever had.
Hard to tell. When Biden continues Trump’s policies, the Trump fans just whine about how “the media” don’t treat the two the same.
With immigration Biden just isn’t face-fucking them hard enough. It’s pathetic.
“ donate at least 25 percent of the proceeds to community programs, such as drug prevention, youth sports, and neighborhood safety initiatives.”
So then they’ll increase their efforts by 25%.
Cops increase efforts? You kidding? No, they will, as the article said, ignore the small fish because they aren’t worth it.
Cop union boss to Christian Surfers: “Here’s some cash. Can I count on your vote to help us rob more Jezebels hippies, Latinos and Blacks?”
See, this is why I don’t subscribe to the magazine.
There’s no bibliography, no reference links, and no evidence that the author left his cave to research a topic.
All of this is supposedly based on public records and conversations, but no documents or transcripts are provided.
There’s nothing in this article that shows the author did not pull it out of his ass.
I can’t see why anyone would pay to read a story without source material.
Good point! Because every other magazine and newspaper cites all their source material! Same with tv news! You fucking owned Reason!
Ride to the rescue, brave Sir Sarcasmic, and rescue fair damsel Reason.
Since Mike’s not paying attention I guess it’s sarcasmic’s job to white knight for lazy writers.
Justthenews.com actually does with their dig in tab. But you dismissed it as right wing news because your boyfriend jeff did.
Sorry, you would be closer to factual if you made things up yourself…..Just the News Questionable and Right Biased based on story selection that mostly favors a conservative perspective. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks and the promotion of conspiracy theories and right-wing propaganda. Virginia’s new method for testing for coronavirus may significantly delay the state’s reopening – Partly False
COVID-19 is close to losing its epidemic status in the U.S., according to the CDC – False
Yale epidemiologist: Dr. Fauci running ‘misinformation campaign’ against hydroxychloroquine – False
“Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared to acknowledge that large numbers of positive COVID-19 cases may arise from oversensitive tests that pick up mere fragments of the virus rather than active, viable infections. If true, many patients may have been receiving false-positive test results” – Inaccurate
“There is no evidence to support the contention that masks would stop influenza while failing to stop COVID”; “Influenza has been renamed COVID-19 in large part” – Mostly False
“Records suggest more than 100 batches of absentee ballots in Fulton County could be missing.” – False Jeff was right, you need to listen to him.
It’s the lazy reprint of what’s coming in the mag, it’s sourced somewhere, but they didn’t care enough to remember that the ink is unlimited on their website.
Even without hyperlinks, a bibliography should be included in any bit of research. Otherwise it’s just fiction or plagiarism.
Not true. Sometimes they post the actual tweets.
What’s the asset forfeiture scene like in other countries? They write about it here like it’s a uniquely American problem, but there must be countries that make our thieving authorities look like pikers. Are there any countries where they’ve managed to rein that phenomenon in?
I did a quick google and it looks like the part where the cops steal what they want and sue the property, requiring the owner to hire an attorney to prove the property’s innocence, is uniquely American.
The rest of the world appears to have some actual due process.
God damn you are a dumb mother fucker.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/rr05_5/p6.html
How quick was your search dumbass?
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190623/19572142461/uk-governments-latest-take-asset-forfeiture-is-pretty-much-you-cant-afford-that.shtml
I mean I can probably do this over 100 times.
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFC-04-2020-0050/full/html
Apparently porn searches don’t provide you information.
https://www.lawyer-monthly.com/2021/04/guilt-not-required-a-look-at-criminal-asset-confiscation-in-australia/
What did you actually search you retarded fuck?
https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en-fr/knowledge/publications/fb94e70f/a-new-mexican-asset-forfeiture-law
The EU in general has these laws dumbass
https://www.velaw.com/insights/the-eu-issues-sweeping-cross-border-asset-seizure-regulations/
Damn, sarc just straight up lied Jeffy style. Actually worse. Jeffy would have at least DONE THE SEARCH that sarc claims he did. He’d have just spun the results.
Seven muted comments. Wow. Apparently some of the how many hundred countries in the world are worse. I thought it was implied that I was talking about first world nations, but I’m sure there are exceptions there too.
Seven. Same troll. I’ll bet twenty bucks they all have the word “you” in them because they’re about me, not what I said.
I love how this loser somehow thinks that people can’t read anything he’s muted, so he can make a fool of himself like this.
The Biden-Reagan Drug Prohibition Looting law of 1986 exported “advisors” with both guns and lawyer briefcases to mow people down and “legally” rob their ranches, planes, cars, trucks, boats, securities and bank accounts. Caudillo mobs and populist looters were quick to comply. Our crash was October 1987, but their per capita GDPs fell until Clinton replaced George Holy War Bush. The looting of Latin America staved off U.S. asset-forfeiture collapse until 2008. Only then did asset forfeiture decrease ever so slightly.
Chris Wallace is leaving FOX and going to CNN.
I’ll bet $20 that Ken will call him a traitor or worse.
Good riddance.
Pedo news network could use some more old bois.
I accept your bet.
Broken.
I’ll bet 20 x $20 that sarc will start sucking Wallace’s dink now whenever he gets half a chance.
Unless and/or until a conviction is required before asset forfeiture can occur, it will be wrong. Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t come with exceptions.
No shit? Well that’s disappointing. I guess we’ll have more hope for the… “qualified immunity” reforms we’ve seen in several states.
I suppose history nerds in 50 years will debate the trends that contributed to the Second Civil War, such as the complete erosion of public trust helped out by police behaving badly.
It’s no secret why people hate police, and only six year olds believe it’s because police stop people from doing bad things.
If the GOP is smart, it will siezed on this and other civil liberty issues that seem to be expanding like a waistline during a pandemic…
My guesstimate is that all the booty siezed to date could be pooled and used to score smart pills sufficient to top off the leadership to do the right thing. Or we could do the practical thing, and donate the money to religious surfers. Why let a good seizure go to waste. I perceive that you don’t take seizure seriously until it happens to you or your ‘law enforcement’ neighbor who suddenly has a new Ferrari in a Pinto budget…
How about Criminal Prosecution of the so called Public Servants playing this Civil Asset Forfeiture Game, or what I would describe as Theft Under Color of Law.
Successful brainwashing stops even Reason writers from considering for one second that looting and bank robbery under color of law might eventually destabilize the economy. Prosecutor Willebrandt used revenue agencies + forfeiture laws to shake down beer barons beginning in 1922. When she published her exposé of how this worked in August 1929, stocks changed to decreasing and the entire economy collapsed. The Liberal Party repeal plank mitigated the disaster by helping FDR defeat the GOP for 12 years.
Successful brainwashing stops even Reason writers from considering for one second that looting and bank robbery under color of law might eventually destabilize the economy. Prosecutor Willebrandt used revenue agencies + forfeiture laws to shake down beer barons beginning in 1922. When she published her exposé of how this worked in August 1929, stocks changed to decreasing and the entire economy collapsed.