PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Tennessee Cops Fight Each Other To Steal Your Money, No Charges Required


KILLER_CLOWN
05-17-2011, 11:12 PM
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WTeH9D_tN-k?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WTeH9D_tN-k?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

Watch this one all the way through. This is uniquely and seriously deranged, not to mention unconstitutional. Cops are fighting turf battles to steal your money, with no need for criminal charges. Don't skip the last 3 minutes, including the f-bomb, threat-laden, cop vs. cop macho challenge.

Pitt Gorilla
05-17-2011, 11:25 PM
Wow.

KILLER_CLOWN
05-17-2011, 11:33 PM
Wow.

The strange part is that even the Police Chief doesn't deny it, just business as usual i guess.

KC native
05-17-2011, 11:34 PM
This shit has been happening for years.

Florida is one of the absolute worst. Texas isn't far behind and apparently Tennessee feels the need to get in the mix. Missouri and the KCPD have their fingers dirty with this shit too.

This is shit has to stop.

Pitt Gorilla
05-17-2011, 11:35 PM
The strange part is that even the Police Chief doesn't deny it, just business as usual i guess.Oh yeah, he didn't even try to deny it. I'm surprised they don't set up a toll booth and just take everybody's money and make them get it back through the courts. I mean, WTF not?

KC native
05-17-2011, 11:41 PM
Oh yeah, he didn't even try to deny it. I'm surprised they don't set up a toll booth and just take everybody's money and make them get it back through the courts. I mean, WTF not?

That's pretty much what happens now except the toll booths are of the rolling variety.

Earthling
05-17-2011, 11:44 PM
This shit has been happening for years.

Florida is one of the absolute worst. Texas isn't far behind and apparently Tennessee feels the need to get in the mix. Missouri and the KCPD have their fingers dirty with this shit too.

This is shit has to stop.

Exactly. Forfeiture laws are the biggest scam going.

Bewbies
05-18-2011, 12:08 AM
Cops are here to serve and collect. How often do you see speed traps in school zones or areas where children play as opposed to the interstates or bottoms of hills?

Our police forces are so bloated it's crazy, yet we are told they are understaffed....

Adept Havelock
05-18-2011, 07:02 PM
What did the idiots who decided police departments get to keep forfeited money expect? When you turn law enforcement into a for-profit endeavor, cops, like any one else, are going to look out for their own self-interest and self-enrichment.

What a craptacular idea.

See the brilliant Roman practice of "Tax Farming" for a historical perspective on this abominable notion.

Der Flöprer
05-30-2011, 03:35 AM
Really? No one gives a shit about this? Fucking pathetic. Just lay down, pull your pants down, and take it in your ass. You have no choice, after all.

notorious
05-30-2011, 06:45 AM
This is fucking stupid. How can stuff like this go on?



I would be furious.


Thank God the police out here are pretty level-headed and try to do the right thing.

johnny961
05-30-2011, 09:40 AM
This is insane. I can't beleive this shit goes on so blatently thea even the interviews and citation records pretty much back the media account. Wow.

BigChiefFan
05-30-2011, 11:26 AM
Some public hangings would curtail this behavior. The greedy fucks need to be made an example of. This is criminal. Our country is run by the mafia.

JohnnyV13
05-30-2011, 02:25 PM
This video shows how we need to get rid of the statist monopoly on law enforcement and privitize it.

Free market policing would solve all of our problems. Wow, us Austrian economist/libertarians are always right. The rest of you are idiots. How can you not realize that profit motive is the only way toward a better america.





















I hope everyone recognizes the sarcasm.

KILLER_CLOWN
05-30-2011, 02:28 PM
This video shows how we need to get rid of the statist monopoly on law enforcement and privitize it.

Free market policing would solve all of our problems. Wow, us Austrian economist/libertarians are always right. The rest of you are idiots. How can you not realize that profit motive is the only way toward a better america.

I hope everyone recognizes the sarcasm.

I think you posted in the wrong thread.

KC native
05-30-2011, 02:30 PM
This video shows how we need to get rid of the statist monopoly on law enforcement and privitize it.

Free market policing would solve all of our problems. Wow, us Austrian economist/libertarians are always right. The rest of you are idiots. How can you not realize that profit motive is the only way toward a better america.





















I hope everyone recognizes the sarcasm.
LMAO

ClevelandBronco
05-30-2011, 02:41 PM
This video shows how we need to get rid of the statist monopoly on law enforcement and privitize it.

Free market policing would solve all of our problems. Wow, us Austrian economist/libertarians are always right. The rest of you are idiots. How can you not realize that profit motive is the only way toward a better america.

I hope everyone recognizes the sarcasm.

Do you think it will be easier to end this kind of abuse when the government is doing it than it would be if a private entity was doing it?

JohnnyV13
05-30-2011, 03:26 PM
Do you think it will be easier to end this kind of abuse when the government is doing it than it would be if a private entity was doing it?

No, but Miseans act like they're so intellectually superior and how privitizing everything will lead to a utopia of rainbow and unicorn perfection.

Mises.org comically had a recent article about the wonders of private policing.

This video shows some of the problems behind privitized policing and privitized law.

The fact is, if we turned police enforcement into an entrepenuerial venture, well.. good luck trying to catch a killer if you're poor and you can't pay the cops. Who is going to care.

We will get all kinds of drug enforcement due to the profit motive involved.

Who cares that some burglar raped 6 women and chopped off their heads? How much money can we make apprehending him?

Now, lets see how many people we can accuse of having a meth lab so we can seize their house, boat, car, cash, jewelry and let them hire lawyers to get it back. "Why, Mr. Chairman, we've retained an elite litigation firm that now caters to law enforcement clients! Let them try to get that money back! Forget about state prosecutors, you get what you pay for."

"Just look at our seizure retention rates once we retained Dewey, Cheatem and Howe! Why, our profit margin shot up to 40%!"

"But sir, look at the how street crimes like burglary, home invasion, aggravated assault and rape have increased. Its a crime wave!"

"That's not our problem. This firm specializes in drug seizures. I mean really, there's just no profit in stopping violent crime. THink man! You're stuck in 21'st century law enforcement thinking! Get with the times! Just look at our profit margins!"

"I'm sorry, Chairman Minderbender. I don't know what came over me. What was I thinking?"

"Its ok, you just lost sight of what's important. Its easy to do; we all grew up watching cop shows back in the old days. Back then, no one realized anything about efficient law enforcement. Why, all of those underployed sabermeticians who used to care about baseball now work for us, ever since we started police reality shows! And, once we figured out that no one cared about watching UGLY criminals, and focused on the crimes committed by sexy babes, we tapped a whole new realm of profits."

"And, to think we used to just give away our broadcast rights for criminal stories to TV and newspapers for free! But, we didn't know anything about efficient law enforcement then. Why, we didn't realize we were public entertainment!"

banyon
05-30-2011, 03:26 PM
This is one of the shoddiest, least objective hit pieces I have seen masquerading as journalism in some time. Ridiculous that so many are outraged by these cheaply edited blurbs cut together to fit this guy's paradigm.

Drug dealers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your cash!

notorious
05-30-2011, 03:28 PM
Why do they pull over cars on one side of the highway 10 times more then the other?

banyon
05-30-2011, 03:30 PM
Why do they pull over cars on one side of the highway 10 times more then the other?

How do you know that to be the case?

Based on this hick reporter's preconceived piece that probably watched these guys for 2 hours one day?

Not that I really have a problem with it even if they are.

notorious
05-30-2011, 03:43 PM
How do you know that to be the case?

Based on this hick reporter's preconceived piece that probably watched these guys for 2 hours one day?

Not that I really have a problem with it even if they are.


I am just going by what the video stated, and the paperwork that the reporter pulled out.

notorious
05-30-2011, 03:50 PM
It creeps me out, to be honest. I run a business that you probably know about in DC, and a lot of times my customers pay me in cash, which is usually a sizable amount.


If I were to get pulled over and they find the cash, I might lose that money until I prove that I am innocent. (If I worked in Tenn.)


I am assuming that they only search a very small percentage of cars, and only the cars that set off a lot of alarms. The guy that got caught with 200,000K has to be dirty somehow, though.

They are basically stating: "You are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. We will hold your cash until you do so".

That is BS.

JohnnyV13
05-30-2011, 03:57 PM
The guy with 200K was probably was just sending payment to some hot wife he's paying to sleep with him for one night, so she can roll around in a whole lot of cash while naked after she has sex with him.

banyon
05-30-2011, 04:02 PM
It creeps me out, to be honest. I run a business that you probably know about in DC, and a lot of times my customers pay me in cash, which is usually a sizable amount.


If I were to get pulled over and they find the cash, I might lose that money until I prove that I am innocent. (If I worked in Tenn.)

Kansas has the same civil forfeiture laws. If you are carrying around $200k wrapped up in bricks of tape, then I would have some concerns, yes.


I am assuming that they only search a very small percentage of cars, and only the cars that set off a lot of alarms. The guy that got caught with 200,000K has to be dirty somehow, though.

Clark and Meade counties' SO are actually very good at this, but the piece is very misleading as it implies that the cops don't need a reason to pull you over or to search, when in fact they need a valid reason to stop and pc to search or consent, just like any other roadway search.

They are basically stating: "You are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. We will hold your cash until you do so".

That is BS.

Actually you just have to show that the money came from a legitimate place, which for normal people is pretty easy to do.

KILLER_CLOWN
05-30-2011, 05:01 PM
This is one of the shoddiest, least objective hit pieces I have seen masquerading as journalism in some time. Ridiculous that so many are outraged by these cheaply edited blurbs cut together to fit this guy's paradigm.

Drug dealers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your cash!

The elephant in the room would like a word with you.

notorious
05-30-2011, 05:14 PM
Kansas has the same civil forfeiture laws. If you are carrying around $200k wrapped up in bricks of tape, then I would have some concerns, yes.




Clark and Meade counties' SO are actually very good at this, but the piece is very misleading as it implies that the cops don't need a reason to pull you over or to search, when in fact they need a valid reason to stop and pc to search or consent, just like any other roadway search.



Actually you just have to show that the money came from a legitimate place, which for normal people is pretty easy to do.


Thanks for clearing that up.

The police around here are very fair and good people. I would have no worries dealing with our local police.

On a side note, I wish I had a 200K brick in my vehicle (legimate, of course). :D

banyon
05-30-2011, 05:22 PM
The elephant in the room would like a word with you.

great argument.

KILLER_CLOWN
05-30-2011, 05:24 PM
great argument.

Thanks. Now if you had watched the video you would notice an officer not interested in the drugs but rather the money and two cops fighting over who can rob one of the victims.

banyon
05-30-2011, 05:39 PM
Thanks. Now if you had watched the video you would notice an officer not interested in the drugs but rather the money and two cops fighting over who can rob one of the victims.

I did watch the video, that's what prompted me to comment on how crappy this guy's preconceived "investigation" was.

It's like "OMG THERE ARE CIVIL FORFEITURE LAWS!!!111!" And they've been on the books for almost 25 years! GASP!

The idiot doesn't even bother to ask the question "Why do these laws exist in the first place?" Which you think would be the start of an objective investigation. Second, he doesn't bother to compare any data, other jurisdictions, places where it has been effective without the continuously implied corrupting influence.

The "video" blurb you refer to is about 10 seconds long at 4:50 and embedded in the rest of the story. The first cop says "leave me the f*ck alone" and the other officer says "If you ever try to crash me out again, it'll be the last time.". It's apparently from 3 years ago, and it's not even clear what the hell they are talking about or whether or not it has to do with this guy's story. Like the rest of the video, it has no context, likely because the context didn't go where this guy wanted it to go.

Amnorix
05-31-2011, 07:47 AM
I have no problem with impounding, but I'd be interested in some analysis around how easy it is to get the money back if/when proved to be from a legitimate source. I remember reading about some granny at an airport (Logan?) losing a brick of cash (like $10K) and had the devil's own time getting it back even though it was obviously legitimate for whatever reason that I can't recall now.

johnny961
05-31-2011, 10:17 AM
I've been reading the replies defending these seizures and I still see a problem. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? There is nothing in itself illegal about carrying large quantities of cash. I have known car guys and other collectors of high end stuff that will to this day go to a show with the intent of buying something the good old fashioned way(cash), and 20k to 40k is not an uncommon buying price. Antique and junk dealers have also been known to carry large sums of cash to buy their fare from individuals. And, if I want to be an idiot and carry my life savings with me in a bag, have I broken a law? These seizure laws were written to allow confiscation of money and property that were obtained through illegal activity, which when enforced properly I do not have a problem with. Seizing money or property in a routine traffic stop when there is no evidence of wrongdoing is what I have issue with. And there is no law against carrying cash. Law Enforcement here is making the assumption that the mere presence of a large sum of cash is automatically associated with wrongdoing, which is a reach. I'm no lawyer but I would almost think that some of these departments would be setting themselves up for a lawsuit if somebody wanted to press the issue hard enough.

BigChiefFan
05-31-2011, 12:16 PM
I've been reading the replies defending these seizures and I still see a problem. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? There is nothing in itself illegal about carrying large quantities of cash. I have known car guys and other collectors of high end stuff that will to this day go to a show with the intent of buying something the good old fashioned way(cash), and 20k to 40k is not an uncommon buying price. Antique and junk dealers have also been known to carry large sums of cash to buy their fare from individuals. And, if I want to be an idiot and carry my life savings with me in a bag, have I broken a law? These seizure laws were written to allow confiscation of money and property that were obtained through illegal activity, which when enforced properly I do not have a problem with. Seizing money or property in a routine traffic stop when there is no evidence of wrongdoing is what I have issue with. And there is no law against carrying cash. Law Enforcement here is making the assumption that the mere presence of a large sum of cash is automatically associated with wrongdoing, which is a reach. I'm no lawyer but I would almost think that some of these departments would be setting themselves up for a lawsuit if somebody wanted to press the issue hard enough.Good post. That's how I see it, as well. I can't believe anybody could defend that behavior.

banyon
05-31-2011, 06:50 PM
I've been reading the replies defending these seizures and I still see a problem. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

These are civil cases, so the standard is preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.

There is nothing in itself illegal about carrying large quantities of cash. I have known car guys and other collectors of high end stuff that will to this day go to a show with the intent of buying something the good old fashioned way(cash), and 20k to 40k is not an uncommon buying price. Antique and junk dealers have also been known to carry large sums of cash to buy their fare from individuals. And, if I want to be an idiot and carry my life savings with me in a bag, have I broken a law?

No, it's not illegal. And you'd be able to show a legitimate source for the funds also.

These seizure laws were written to allow confiscation of money and property that were obtained through illegal activity, which when enforced properly I do not have a problem with. Seizing money or property in a routine traffic stop when there is no evidence of wrongdoing is what I have issue with. And there is no law against carrying cash. Law Enforcement here is making the assumption that the mere presence of a large sum of cash is automatically associated with wrongdoing, which is a reach. I'm no lawyer but I would almost think that some of these departments would be setting themselves up for a lawsuit if somebody wanted to press the issue hard enough.

The laws were written to stop drug dealing from being a profitable enterprise. It had gotten to the point in the mid 80's where it was easily worth it to spend a couple of years in prison because at the end of it you were going to have millions in the bank wen you got out. People thought that it was wrong that the major drug dealers could just walk away with so much cash from ill-gotten gains.

But, with budget cuts galore in city and county budgets, there are some pressures that can improperly motivate officers in this area. The remedy for that is to be vigilant against corruption and to elect city and county officials who will hold corrupt conduct accountable, not to throw out the entire concept because two jerks on the side of a highway in TN can't agree on who should conduct a traffic stop.

BucEyedPea
05-31-2011, 07:14 PM
Good post. That's how I see it, as well. I can't believe anybody could defend that behavior.

They act like most tax feeders act. :# That get to wear a govt costume.

Saul Good
05-31-2011, 07:16 PM
I think it's bullshit. There is absolutely no such thing as the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and there shouldn't be. It's not practical. If you assume that someone is innocent, you don't handcuff him and throw him in jail.

BucEyedPea
05-31-2011, 07:17 PM
The guy with 200K was probably was just sending payment to some hot wife he's paying to sleep with him for one night, so she can roll around in a whole lot of cash while naked after she has sex with him.

How would you know about this sort of thing? * raises eyebrow * :hmmm:

BucEyedPea
05-31-2011, 07:22 PM
No, but Miseans act like they're so intellectually superior and how privitizing everything will lead to a utopia of rainbow and unicorn perfection.

Hmmmmm. :harumph:


BTW you still don't understand that Mises never promised any utopia or perfection. That's your own extrapolation. It's socialists that promise utopia. There's no such thing as a perfect system but some systems do work better and are more efficient than govt; not to mention too much govt leads to corruption and abuses of power. The kind of power that can land you in jail.

So if you think Miseans act like they're intellectually superior and may just be because you never really understood Mises and they like to point that out. It's one thing to disagree, it's another to misunderstand some of their claims.

banyon
05-31-2011, 10:30 PM
I think it's bullshit. There is absolutely no such thing as the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and there shouldn't be. It's not practical. If you assume that someone is innocent, you don't handcuff him and throw him in jail.

That is the instruction you give to a jury at the outset of a trial.

But for practical purposes, it cannot be the standard of police, prosecutors, or even the judge prior to trial, otherwise, no one would ever get arrested or held in jail pending the trial.

banyon
05-31-2011, 10:30 PM
They act like most tax feeders act. :# That get to wear a govt costume.

I probably paid more in taxes than you last year.

You still subsisting indirectly on the government teat via your student's tax-subsidized loans and grants?

KILLER_CLOWN
05-31-2011, 10:38 PM
I think it's bullshit. There is absolutely no such thing as the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and there shouldn't be. It's not practical. If you assume that someone is innocent, you don't handcuff him and throw him in jail.

This is about as UnAmerican as it gets.

JohnnyV13
06-01-2011, 03:49 PM
Hmmmmm. :harumph:


So if you think Miseans act like they're intellectually superior and may just be because you never really understood Mises and they like to point that out. It's one thing to disagree, it's another to misunderstand some of their claims.

Ummm...I can very easily prove my point just by quoting articles from Mises.org.

Hell, I can prove that point EVERY WEEK, with significant overkill.

You just don't see it, because you think what they're saying is 95% (or more) true.

Your post is a perfect example of Misean arrogance. "Oh you only think Miseans act superior because you're too dumb to understand us."

Ummmmm.....sorry....but that's a pretty concise definition of arrogance.

JohnnyV13
06-01-2011, 04:45 PM
How would you know about this sort of thing? * raises eyebrow * :hmmm:

Its the only way I can get a date, of course.

I also look like Robert Redford.