OUR SPIN on Forfeiture by NYC

Mike Steindel (CLaw7MAn@webtv.net)
Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:54:30 -0800 (PST)

Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Don has a very good idea. With so much media attention on the NYC
Forfeiture Law of automobiles for driving under the influence, we the
WoD victims may be able to grab some headlines. 

We all need to start writing our own stories and sending them in to the
media. There are many forfeiture cases on a daily basis where no drugs
are found and the siezures are based solely on the amount of cash in the
victims posession. In fact I believe there was a news story done on an
area in Louisiana where the sheriff targeted out of state cars...

You can just bet that many other cities will now be considering this
type of manuever to take valuebles from its citizens. I wonder if Mayor
Rudy and the Police Chief own a used car lot or have a big interest in
one. I wonder if anybody in Govt. thinks beyond how to punish people. I
do not advocate driving a car while under the influence of anything. I
also do not think we should tempt policemen with the authority to
confiscate expensive property. This lapse in judgement is going to lead
to a much bigger problem than drunk driving.

The New York Police Dept has been involved in many scandels ranging from
bribery, theft, racism, torture and quite possibly murder. How can a
city put so much power into the hands of such a dangerous orginazation.
The siezures are done on the spot no courts no judges and no lawyers
just you and the guy with the badge & gun...once your car is in their
hands who knows what might turn up in the trunk....

We have our work cut out for us but now we may have a more responsive
audience to listen to us. This will impact mom & pop america....mike  

Content-Description: signature
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/HTML; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

Forum: www.libertyjournal.com/liberty_forums/index.cfm?cfapp=10"
--WebTV-Mail-849022364-732 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from mailsorter-101-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net ( by postoffice-162.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:58:41 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from lyris.teleport.com (lyris.teleport.com []) by mailsorter-101-3.iap.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97) with SMTP id HAA02577; Mon, 22 Feb 1999 07:58:41 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: From: "Don Beck" To: Subject: [cp] NYC Car Forfeiture and WoD Attitudes Impact Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:57:13 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: bulk The news this morning is full of the New York policy re forfeiture of cars of DWI suspects. The principal objection being heard is from "civil libertarians" who think A) Forfeiture before conviction is wrong, even unconstitutional; B) The law's effects will be visited most harshly on the poor and middle class, i.e. those unable to buy or lease another BMW as soon as they make bail; and C) That "taken all together, won't this law cause more problems than it solves?" This last was uttered in connection with the possible family-devastating consequences of summary loss of the car by a family breadwinner like sudden unemployment and reliance on welfare. I couldn't determine whether civil or criminal forfeiture was in play, but apparently it is assumed that a car will be returned upon acquittal-after the aforementioned consequences take place. Proponents and supporters were heard saying in this morning's MSNBC newscasts: A) "Deterrence is the best way to reduce the incidence of drunk driving," B) "We're simply removing the instrumentality of crime from the criminal's possession," and C) "The program will pay for itself through the sale of the seized cars." God Almighty, where have I heard THIS stuff before? My question to the list is, to what good use (if any) can our side in the WoD put this controversy? I invite comment and philosophy! Regards, Don Beck --- To subscribe to the Constitutional Cannabis Patriots send a blank message to join-cp@telelists.com Posting:To post to the Constitutional Cannabis Patriots send e-mail to cp@telelists.com Constitutional Cannabis Patriots http://www.teleport.com/~nepal/canpat.htm --WebTV-Mail-849022364-732--