That was a leftie slogan back in the 1960s, and I was reminded of it by this startling statistic:
An economic consulting firm reported on data last week showing that the approximately $4.5 billion in annual forfeitures now exceeds the $3.9 billion Americans lose in robberies each year. The clear point: Your local police or sheriff’s department is more likely to take your stuff than a robber. The Institute for Justice report found the problem getting worse. “It’s exploding, despite the fact that the issue is getting a lot of attention,” said Dick Carpenter, one of the study’s authors. According to the report, forfeiture revenues have more than doubled between 2002 to 2013. California agencies collected approximately $280 million over the 11-year study period—and an additional $696 million by partnering with federal agencies.
Which is why California and many other states refuse to do anything about unconstitutional asset forfeitures.
Like other criminals, they want the money!
Unlike other criminals, they don’t worry about the downside of getting caught.
Comments
16 responses to ““Who are the real criminals?””
As Frank Herbert said about Mexico, the police are the organized crime. It’s one stop shopping.
We’ve spent several decades setting the police up as a protected class. Glorified, privileged and protected. I blame alliteration and Kojak.
Some propagandistic phrases just trip off the tongue, and subvert reasoning; drunk driving, road rage, COP KILLER. The police are fellow citizens, charged by we the people with certain responsibilities. Killing a cop should not carry any higher or different set of penalties than killing anyone else. That repulsive TV show in particular really rubbed in the rot. We now have armed goon squads operating under color of law, and exalted for it.
this is positive side benefit of war on drugs which main aim was to stop black people from voting with felony and in some places misdemeanor convictions for drugs. Obama gets 95% 0f black vote but if civil rights were restored for black people along with ending voter suppression of black democrats it would be 99% of blacks voting for him!
I’ll grant this much –
Anti-drug hysteria really got going in the 1930’s based on the delirious fear that hopped up Negroes and jazz musicians were going to rape your daughter and insult your dog. Or rape your dog and insult your daughter, it’s all good. And a big, fat hairy flip of the finger at Harry Anslinger for stoking the feeding frenzy.
I think Nixon’s interest in banning drugs wasn’t so much racism as much as going after those dope smoking, smelly, long hair commie hippy freaks in the anti war movement. If I didn’t like getting high so much I might sympathize.
Now I want to drag out all my old Freak Brothers comix.
Back to the main issue, giving armed goon squads, errr, the police the right to confiscate and keep property is a first rate example of what economists call a perverse incentive. It’s insane to expect anything other than the situation as it exists, who ever thought allowing this was a good idea?
Why isn’t it a taking under the 5th amendment?
http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment5.html
I miss the Constitution.
MMM,
There is a new word in the dictionary.
COPSUCKER
Re: Nixon.
“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the anti-war left and black people. We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting people to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, break up their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” –John Erlichman
Famous FFB saying:
“Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope.”
And of course Mr. Natural.
As a kid I was taught that police and firefighters were civilians, specifically separate from the military. Peace officers. Public servants. In the last 30 years or so I noticed that police and firefighters “other” non-police/firefighters by calling them “civilians”, sometimes derogatorily. Many think they’re special, many think they’re GI Joe. In addition to eliminating prohibition, eliminating wage and benefits bargaining by government unions would reduce the number of people who take up those jobs strictly for profit, legal or illegal.
Do you think Erlichman is an entirely credible source?
I notice most conservatives blogs are pretending the colorado planned parenthood shootings didn’t happen.
Cap’n, 78 people have died in traffic accidents so far this year in Colorado Department of Transportation’s Region 2, which includes Colorado Springs.
Should cars be banned to stop this insane carnage?
The link.
when cars are outlawed only outlaws will have cars.
Do you think Erlichman is an entirely credible source?
He is corroborated by other members of the Nixon administration.
“You know,” Nixon said, ” those who use drugs are the protesters. You know, the ones who get caught up in dissent and violence. They’re the same group of people.”
“[Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks” Haldeman, his Chief of Staff wrote, “The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to.”
The aftermath of the Nixon administration was a circular back stab, so still not too sure how much I trust this.
Meanwhile, the cities were burning, the violent anti war movement was a KGB operation, and groups like the Black Panthers and el Rukins were nothing more than criminal gangs who had learned a little Marxist rhetoric.
Let’s cut to the chase. All governments are criminal. The origin of government is whichever goon could bash enough heads to make himself boss.