Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
I'm sorry, but those are the laws. Governments are not evil because you say so. If he's got the ability to prove this is his cash, then it's his. They haven't denied him due process.
Saying that the New Mexico police are Stasi is incredibly insulting.
|
Ummmm excuse me, having to prove innocence IS unconstitutional.... having to prove the money is yours is having to prove innocence... and again THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Yes they did deny him due process, how do you prove the money is yours? And where is the law that states you cannot carry your money with you? Especially as a truck driver. He may have just dropped a load off in El Paso, he may have been using that money to pick a load up that was COD. He has that right.
Quote:
|
The government has the constitutional right AND responsibility to control interstate commerce. Obviously, you're unclear of the map of the United States, since he was stopped at a weigh station north of El Paso, which is actually a border town.
|
North of El Paso is the U.S., El Paso is in the U.S. so it is extremely possible to have never crossed the border. Obviously, you are unclear of the map of the area. Here's a map:
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp...0Paso&state=TX
Now, knowing the area, he could have been coming from East or West I10 had a drop off in El Paso and was taking N54 to I40, which many truckers in that area do.
So to imply, or for our government to imply he came from South of the border is ridiculous.
From an outsiders view, someone who was in a true Iron Curtain country (Romania) and had heard of our "great freedoms".... I could see how they could compare what the article said to the Stasi, I don't see it as a reach at all.
(This is just taking what we do know from the article. Since the article looks to be cut, there could be more information we are not given.... I base my input solely on what we have been given.)
Quote:
|
Why don't you try some discussion of the situation instead of just posting flame-bait?
|
I think he had a decent OP and one that could provoke intelligent conversation.
Personally, I think this statement is an over reaction.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JumpinJesus
need we do this?
the 4th amendment not only covers searches, but seizure as well. What cause did the government have to seize his property? The law states that the specific items to be seized must be noted in a warrant. I don't see in any way how the government has a case here.
Why do we allow this?
|
No we do not need to do this.
The government does not have a case. (Again, based on only what we know from the case.)
"We" allow this because the government and powers that be have the average citizen more worried about paying their bills, Paris Hilton, Secondhand smoke, Trans Fat, the Boogeyman and whatever other distraction serves their purposes.
We can allow 1000's of illegals in daily but we "need" to stop a truck driver and take his money........ wow that is fucking unAmerican.
Then again, we do have a war to pay for.