The Glade 4.0 :: View topic

Spoiler:

Article wrote:

OKLAHOMA CITY (KFSM) — The Oklahoma Highway Patrol is using a new device that enables them to seize money in your bank account.

Last month, the OHP started using 16 ERADs, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine, reported News on 9.

The process of seizing money electronically works similar to civil asset forfeiture, where police can seize property or cash if they believe it is connected to a crime. They can do this without a warrant or arrest, and they don’t have to prove a crime was committed first.

If a trooper suspects you have money tied to a crime, the highway patrol can use the ERAD to scan any cards you have and seize the money.

“We’re gonna look for different factors in the way that you’re acting,” Oklahoma Highway Patrol Lt. John Vincent told News on 9. “We’re gonna look for if there’s a difference in your story. If there’s someway that we can prove that you’re falsifying information to us about your business.”

Once someone’s money is seized, it is up to them to prove that the money is not connected to the crime.

“If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that money, it will be given back to you,” Vincent said. “And we’ve done that in the past.”

However, State Sen. Kyle Loveless, R-Oklahoma City, told News on 9 that the ability to seize money like that removes due process and the belief that a suspect is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

He said he has already seen instances where police have abused the system, so he is planning on introducing legislation to change it.

Loveless said he will propose legislation that will require a conviction before any assets could be seized.

“If I had to err on the side of one side versus the other, I would err on the side of the Constitution,” Loveless said. “And I think that’s what we need to do.”

According to News on 9, OHP paid ERAD Group Inc. $5,000 for the software and scanners, and will give them then 7.7 percent of all the cash the highway patrol seizes.

To read more at our affiliate News on 9, click here.

Author:	darksiege [ Thu Jun 09, 2016 7:14 pm ]
Post subject:	*Fck you OHP**
44 hit ULTRANOPE For link impaired: Spoiler: Article wrote: OKLAHOMA CITY (KFSM) — The Oklahoma Highway Patrol is using a new device that enables them to seize money in your bank account. Last month, the OHP started using 16 ERADs, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine, reported News on 9. The process of seizing money electronically works similar to civil asset forfeiture, where police can seize property or cash if they believe it is connected to a crime. They can do this without a warrant or arrest, and they don’t have to prove a crime was committed first. If a trooper suspects you have money tied to a crime, the highway patrol can use the ERAD to scan any cards you have and seize the money. “We’re gonna look for different factors in the way that you’re acting,” Oklahoma Highway Patrol Lt. John Vincent told News on 9. “We’re gonna look for if there’s a difference in your story. If there’s someway that we can prove that you’re falsifying information to us about your business.” Once someone’s money is seized, it is up to them to prove that the money is not connected to the crime. “If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that money, it will be given back to you,” Vincent said. “And we’ve done that in the past.” However, State Sen. Kyle Loveless, R-Oklahoma City, told News on 9 that the ability to seize money like that removes due process and the belief that a suspect is presumed innocent until proven guilty. He said he has already seen instances where police have abused the system, so he is planning on introducing legislation to change it. Loveless said he will propose legislation that will require a conviction before any assets could be seized. “If I had to err on the side of one side versus the other, I would err on the side of the Constitution,” Loveless said. “And I think that’s what we need to do.” According to News on 9, OHP paid ERAD Group Inc. $5,000 for the software and scanners, and will give them then 7.7 percent of all the cash the highway patrol seizes. To read more at our affiliate News on 9, click here.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 7:48 am ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Won't last. This is not surviving an appeals court, much less the USSC.

Author:	RangerDave [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:46 am ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Yeah, civil forfeiture in general needs a good USSC smackdown. Can't believe it hasn't been squashed before.

Author:	Screeling [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:06 am ]
Post subject:
Whoa. DE and RD in agreement.

Author:	Müs [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:54 am ]
Post subject:
I agree with both of them.

The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/

F*ck you OHP https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=11677	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Diamondeye [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Müs wrote: I agree with both of them. Let's not get carried away here. We can't have this sort of thing. It just won't do.

Author:	Khross [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 1:16 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
There's a larger problem, though. The states in general are reluctant to listen to the Supreme Court on matters of civil forfeiture. It's big business and a huge revenue stream.

Author:	darksiege [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Then OHP should be Open Season if they do this ****. It is a scumbag thing to do.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 3:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
darksiege wrote: Then OHP should be Open Season if they do this **. It is a scumbag thing to do. I presume you're en route to Oklahoma to take a crack at them yourself? Let us know how that works out for you. This is a civilized country. It doesn't need to be "open season" on anyone, for any reason. barbarians like ISIS do ** like that.

Author:	Corolinth [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:
You know how you've advocated that every now and then someone needs to get beaten to demonstrate the point that certain behavior is unacceptable? You've most recently expressed that idea to me regarding foreign policy. I believe your specific analogy was that obnoxious kid in school who likes to antagonize the big kid who will get in trouble if hits back. Well this is another one of those cases. Negative consequences don't exist to punish government entities that overstep their bounds. We haven't dumped a tax collector into a barrel of boiling tar, covered him with feathers, and then hung him from a tree by his feet in over two hundred years. I mean, what's the worst that happens to these agencies? They have to return whatever money they have remaining? After having kept it for an indeterminate length of time, earning interest on it, and depriving the victim of that same interest? I believe there is a happy medium where we can be civilized human beings, and skin corrupt bureaucrats alive.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Fri Jun 10, 2016 9:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
Corolinth wrote: You know how you've advocated that every now and then someone needs to get beaten to demonstrate the point that certain behavior is unacceptable? You've most recently expressed that idea to me regarding foreign policy. I believe your specific analogy was that obnoxious kid in school who likes to antagonize the big kid who will get in trouble if hits back. Countries are not people. The same rules of behavior do not apply between nation-states as to the citizens within a nation-state. Furthermore, the fact that we don't allow people to take the law into their own hands does not mean we live in a utopia where that never happens. Acknowledging the reality does not mean abandoning the principle. Quote: Well this is another one of those cases. Negative consequences don't exist to punish government entities that overstep their bounds. We have courts to provide those consequences - and indeed, to determine whether bounds have been overstepped in the first place. That protection exists for the authorities because it exists for you; we do not leave it up to the OHP trooper to ultimately decide if you have done wrong or not and we similarly do not let a bunch of malcontents determine when an authority figure has done so. I should also point out that it's very hard to punish an "entity" of any kind, government or not, that's not an actual person. Your perception that "consequences don't exist" really means "Consequences that viscerally satisfy me" don't exist. Quote: We haven't dumped a tax collector into a barrel of boiling tar, covered him with feathers, and then hung him from a tree by his feet in over two hundred years. I mean, what's the worst that happens to these agencies? They have to return whatever money they have remaining? After having kept it for an indeterminate length of time, earning interest on it, and depriving the victim of that same interest? I am pretty sure the tax system does not consist of a bunch of money sitting around in a big pile somewhere, and I am absolutely certain it is not just sitting around earning interest. Furthermore, let me assure you that once you start pulling triggers on tarring and feathering in an angry mob, the authorities will be more than happy to return the favor, and in spades. I'll definitely put my money on organization, training, and preparation over a bunch of angry lunatics. Even when the authorities softball it, as we saw with several riots in the past year, the most the loons can accomplish is to burn a few buildings and police cars. Or hang out at a ranch in Montana doing donuts until the FBI catches you. Quote: I believe there is a happy medium where we can be civilized human beings, and skin corrupt bureaucrats alive. Let me put it like this. If you want to gather up Mus, Elmo, Darksiege, and a few other Gladers and go have a knife fight with a comparable number of OHP troopers, I'll see what I can do to arrange that. Also, my money is on the OHP troopers, and you don't get to pick me as one of the Gladers. Assuming, of course, you're not just internet-shit-talking. We live in a society where you can make a good living designing electric motors. Part of the price for living in that society instead of one where you're defending your grass hut with an AK-47 is that you have to let someone else decide if the bureaucrats are corrupt or not, and sometimes you're just going to be told no, they aren't, even when you disagree with it.

Author:	Xequecal [ Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:20 am ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
I'm curious as to what it is about civil forfeiture that makes people think it's OK to commit homicide over it. Is it the fact that the money is seized immediately rather than after the court case? That's literally the only difference between what happens and an actual civil lawsuit. I mean, would it be any better if, instead of taking the money, the police served you with a summons where you're required to show up in civil court and demonstrate why you shouldn't have the money seized? The standard of evidence at that hearing would be exactly the same as the standard at the current ones where you argue to get your money back, and you're nearly certain to lose. It's a civil case, so they don't need to prove their side beyond a reasonable doubt. All they have to do is show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the money was obtained from or was going to be used in a criminal enterprise. That's trivially easy for them to do, because if you get pulled over on a highway that's a known drug smuggling corridor with $20,000 in your trunk, it's overwhelmingly likely from those facts alone that this is money from crime.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Sat Jun 11, 2016 1:13 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Xequecal wrote: I'm curious as to what it is about civil forfeiture that makes people think it's OK to commit homicide over it. Is it the fact that the money is seized immediately rather than after the court case? Primarily the fact that they're contemplating it on the internet, where they can ignore the obvious consequences - either the immediate consequences of losing the actual fight and finding themselves dead or in the hospital followed by prison, or the larger consequences if this sort of thing were allowed to proliferate. It's easy to be a tough guy on the internet; in reality no one wants to bell the cat.

Author:	Müs [ Sun Jun 12, 2016 9:51 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Xequecal wrote: I'm curious as to what it is about civil forfeiture that makes people think it's OK to commit homicide over it. Is it the fact that the money is seized immediately rather than after the court case? That's literally the only difference between what happens and an actual civil lawsuit. I mean, would it be any better if, instead of taking the money, the police served you with a summons where you're required to show up in civil court and demonstrate why you shouldn't have the money seized? The standard of evidence at that hearing would be exactly the same as the standard at the current ones where you argue to get your money back, and you're nearly certain to lose. It's a civil case, so they don't need to prove their side beyond a reasonable doubt. All they have to do is show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the money was obtained from or was going to be used in a criminal enterprise. That's trivially easy for them to do, because if you get pulled over on a highway that's a known drug smuggling corridor with $20,000 in your trunk, it's overwhelmingly likely from those facts alone that this is money from crime. I don't agree with the homicide part, but this country you're innocent until proven guilty. These civil forfeiture laws are super easy to abuse. And, in fact are abused all the damn time. But, since they're a fairly simple stream of revenue for the police forces... there's no real impetus to actually put a stop to it.

Author:	Müs [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 1:27 am ]
Post subject:
If someone wasn't making beaucoup bucks from it, it wouldn't be allowed to keep happening.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 7:43 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Elmarnieh wrote: Your passports to Elmostan are in the mail. Welcome countrymen. Please provide GPS coordinates. Asking for a firing solu... friend.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Diamondeye [ Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:43 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Müs wrote: But, since they're a fairly simple stream of revenue for the police forces... there's no real impetus to actually put a stop to it. Fortunately, its not up to the police whether it continues or not.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re:
Müs wrote: If someone wasn't making beaucoup bucks from it, it wouldn't be allowed to keep happening. If you think the problem is unsolvable, there's no point in complaining about it.

Author:	darksiege [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 12:22 pm ]
Post subject:
Where is the difference between some ** sucking criminal who comes up to you and steals all your and a ** sucking cop who does the same? Why does one get special treatment because of a badge while the other does not? If one thief can be shot, the other should be able to also. End of line, there is no continue. Either a robber can be shot in the course of his robbery or he cannot. Hiding behind a badge to do it actually makes you worse because you are abusing the public trust. Not trying to be an internet badass, trying to hold criminal behavior to the same standard. One crook is not special because he is a cop.

Author:	Xequecal [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 12:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
darksiege wrote: Where is the difference between some ** sucking criminal who comes up to you and steals all your and a ** sucking cop who does the same? Why does one get special treatment because of a badge while the other does not? If one thief can be shot, the other should be able to also. End of line, there is no continue. Either a robber can be shot in the course of his robbery or he cannot. Hiding behind a badge to do it actually makes you worse because you are abusing the public trust. Not trying to be an internet badass, trying to hold criminal behavior to the same standard. One crook is not special because he is a cop. It's not criminal behavior, it's a bog standard civil lawsuit. Literally anyone else can seize money from you under the same burden of proof, it's not just the cops. Like it or not, we live in a country where the primary factor that prevents people from abusing the civil law system is that lawyers are expensive. This means that if you are well bankrolled, you basically rake it in by suing people en masse on various pretexts. Since you know that only a small percentage of your targets will be willing to pay a lawyer thousands of dollars in order to defend themselves, you can be left with a hefty profit even after paying for a lawyer to fight the few people who do fight back. Seriously, there is a whole private industry based around this, patent trolls will buy up patents and copyrights, then put that material up on Bittorrent sites themselves for the express purpose of being able to sue people that download it.

Author:	RangerDave [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Re:
Xequecal wrote: It's not criminal behavior, it's a bog standard civil lawsuit. Literally anyone else can seize money from you under the same burden of proof, it's not just the cops. Not true. In a private civil suit, the plaintiff can't take your property by force and then initiate a lawsuit to justify keeping it. In a private civil suit, the plaintiff doesn't just have to prove a "substantial nexus" between the asset and whatever activity they think entitles them to the asset; they have to actually prove that they have a particular right to that particular asset. In a private civil suit, there isn't a massive unofficial bias in favor of the plaintiff such that the plaintiff's assertions are treated with a significant degree of deference and assumed credibility. And in a private civil suit, a plaintiff who loses and is found to have wrongfully taken property to which they were never entitled is not immune from prosecution and personal liability.

Author:	Elmarnieh [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Your passports to Elmostan are in the mail. Welcome countrymen.

Author:	Diamondeye [ Mon Jun 13, 2016 7:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re:
darksiege wrote: Where is the difference between some ** sucking criminal who comes up to you and steals all your and a sucking cop who does the same? The fact that you can go to court and contest the latter. The difficulty of contesting the latter is the fault of the legislature, not the police. Also, don't use loaded language. The cops are not " sucking" because you don't like the law. Quote: Why does one get special treatment because of a badge while the other does not? If one thief can be shot, the other should be able to also. End of line, there is no continue. Because one is, by definition, not a thief. A thief is not "someone acquiring property in a way I don't think is fair"; its a person acquiring property in a manner contrary to law. Quote: Either a robber can be shot in the course of his robbery or he cannot. Hiding behind a badge to do it actually makes you worse because you are abusing the public trust. You are not abusing the public trust by following the law, regardless of what you think of that law. Quote:** Not trying to be an internet badass, trying to hold criminal behavior to the same standard. One crook is not special because he is a cop. The only thing you are doign is trying to substitute your version of what you think the law should be like for what it actually is. There is a system for changing it. This is a bad law, but it is getting more and more notice. In the meantime it is the law, and law enforcement officers following it are not criminals. Your argument that they are is a classic Stolen Concept Fallacy, accepting the idea of law, while rejecting a law made under the system that allows law to function because you don't like it. You are too old to be engaging in this type of thinking.

Author:	Serienya [ Tue Jun 14, 2016 10:14 am ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
RangerDave wrote: Yeah, civil forfeiture in general needs a good USSC smackdown. Can't believe it hasn't been squashed before. TOTALLY. I can't figure out why it doesn't violate one's rights to due process, etc.

Author:	darksiege [ Tue Jun 14, 2016 2:27 pm ]
Post subject:	*Re: Fck you OHP**
Serienya wrote: TOTALLY. I can't figure out why it doesn't violate one's rights to due process, etc. Because we apparently do not have the right to not be poor.