jump to last post 1-10 of 10 discussions (139 posts)

Seems US cops are a menace to everyone

  1. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 8 days ago

    An Australian woman called the cops in Minneapolis after hearing suspicious noises outside, approached the car that responded and was shot dead by the cop in the passenger seat.

    They had not turned on their body cameras.



    http://www.startribune.com/woman-killed … 4782213/#6

    1. promisem profile image95
      promisemposted 8 days ago in reply to this

      The real menace is the flood of guns in this country thanks to the radical NRA. Police are acting out of fear.

      1. Live to Learn profile image80
        Live to Learnposted 8 days ago in reply to this

        I'd like to see a list of the NRA members who have made cops fearful. I don't know whether you realize this, or not, but most criminals have not obtained their guns through legal means. Most probably fall under the part of the law which doesn't allow felons to own firearms.

        1. Will Apse profile image89
          Will Apseposted 8 days ago in reply to this

          According to U.S Justice Department figures, 94,000 weapons were recovered from Mexican drug cartels in the five years between 2006 and 2011, of which 64,000 came from the United States.

          The guns were bought legally, sold to smugglers and converted from single fire to assault rifle specification.

          The NRA, the US arms industry which supports it, and the politicians who take their money bear a heavy responsibility.

          1. Live to Learn profile image80
            Live to Learnposted 8 days ago in reply to this

            I don't know the particulars but I would think if someone bought a fire arm, legally, then sold it to someone for illegal purposes their right to purchase fire arms would be revoked.

          2. m-a-w-g profile image82
            m-a-w-gposted 3 days ago in reply to this

            You mean where the US Government sold arms in order to track them and then LOST the trail and had nothing to show for such a stupid move?  I don't think the NRA had anything to do with that.  That was a sting gone horribly wrong and gave cartels guns.

      2. promisem profile image95
        promisemposted 8 days ago in reply to this

        Nowhere did I say NRA members are making cops fearful. I said cops are fearful because of the flood of guns in this country, which is a direct result of the NRA's mindless opposition to all gun laws.

        Regarding felons, they easily get their guns from unlicensed sellers. A background check should be required on all gun sales. An online lookup would be an easy step.

        1. m-a-w-g profile image82
          m-a-w-gposted 3 days ago in reply to this

          I don't think I would place too much blame on the NRA, possibly the degradation of our morals and ethics in general.  Gun laws will always have loopholes, there will always be a black market, people skilled can make their own, and the list can go on.
          Laws keep good people honest, and that's about it.  A lot of times politicians chasing strict gun control are so ignorant about what they are talking about, that it is scary that they are preaching propaganda about such things.

          1. Will Apse profile image89
            Will Apseposted 3 days ago in reply to this

            So your highly professional cops could never enact gun control laws? I have a feeling they would try pretty hard given that they are one of the main groups of victims of gun crime.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 3 days ago in reply to this

              A lot of cops favor gun control laws.

              Consider the average person they interact with: druggies, killers, gangs, etc.  Instead of building their opinion from the majority of people, it is built on the criminal element; the very people who will keep their guns after law abiding citizens are forced to give them up.  In other words, cops are as susceptible to irrational arguments as you are.

              1. Will Apse profile image89
                Will Apseposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                I reckon American right-wingers just like wallowing in violence and despair. They cannot imagine anything better than the blood-soaked culture they have created with their racism, devil take the hindmost social values, and dedication to a mind crushing stasis, without the possibility of change.

                You are sentenced to live in the environment that you have created.

                Life without parole.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 3 days ago in reply to this

                  You may be right - God knows that we spend far too much time, energy and money on the futile confiscation of guns when never even trying to address the causes of that violence.  Appearance ("See?  I'm doing something") before function ("You must change your culture to slow violence"), always.  Perhaps one day when we can learn to set aside politics we'll make an honest effort.

                  1. Live to Learn profile image80
                    Live to Learnposted 2 days ago in reply to this

                    Don't be looking across the pond for a lead on that one.

      3. MizBejabbers profile image89
        MizBejabbersposted 8 days ago in reply to this

        Then perhaps "chickens" should not be hired as police. Do city and state police agencies not give a rigorous psychological test to applicants? If they don't, then they should. We need to be able to trust our police and feel safer when they are around, not have to run from them, too. This woman was white, but race shouldn't be an issue.

        1. Penelope99 profile image61
          Penelope99posted 4 days ago in reply to this

          It shouldn't be an issue but the issue here in Minneapolis is complicated by the fact that the officer in question is a Somali (black but not African American) That's why there is not much information out here as of this time. There is also some talk about quotas on the police force. I have heard that this man did not have the exact training that is required but was expedited to add PC totals of Somali immigrants to the force.  If you don't live in this city you will not get the big picture.  Minneapolis has the largest population of Somali immigrants in the US.

    2. Credence2 profile image87
      Credence2posted 8 days ago in reply to this

      My problem is that there are a few of those on the Right that consider body cams as a unnecessary accouterment. It is obvious regardless how this thing turns out that the cams are necessary and should be mandatory. There is going to be hell to pay as to what happened to the woman and why the cameras were not operating. A couple of pink slips are in order at the minimum, just for not having your cameras running.

      Maybe now that a white female, a foreigner, is involved these issues regarding police behavior will be taken seriously as opposed to when merely 'black thugs' are involved???

    3. m-a-w-g profile image82
      m-a-w-gposted 2 days ago in reply to this

      This shooting and guns are two different topics to me.  This shooting needs to be investigated further, would prefer a 3rd party.  Body cams need to be on anytime on duty, anything could happen at any time and when your job is to be in places of danger then they should be recording at all times.  This whole issue is very concerning.

  2. Nathanville profile image90
    Nathanvilleposted 8 days ago

    I totally agree, it’s very alarming:-

    •    The police in the USA have so far shot dead 523 in 2017. 
    •    In 2016 it was 963 killings, and
    •    In 2015 it was 991.

  3. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 8 days ago

    Shooting a woman who calls for help has to be a new low.

    1. Live to Learn profile image80
      Live to Learnposted 8 days ago in reply to this

      You make it sound as if the officer did it on purpose.  I'm surprised innocent until proven guilty is only an American concept.

      1. Will Apse profile image89
        Will Apseposted 8 days ago in reply to this

        She's dead and a cop killed her.

        The defence will something like this be:

        She had something in her hand
        She made a sudden movement
        She spoke loudly
        She surprised us.

        Good enough for the US public, normally.

        1. Live to Learn profile image80
          Live to Learnposted 8 days ago in reply to this

          I think we probably see eye to eye more closely than we are willing to admit. It does appear that cops are given a 'get out of jail free' card oftentimes. But, I don't think the American public simply turns a blind eye. I think, when juries acquit, most understand that the job is difficult, dangerous, and requires split second decisions that can save their lives; and take them. We may not feel they should have been acquitted but we do see where some juries could be convinced to do so. Human error can be fatal when lethal weapons are involved.

          I don't know the circumstances of this incident. We never will, since no cameras were in place. That is why I am a firm advocate of body cameras on all cops. To give us better information as to what is going on. Personally, I have a firm distaste for cops. 'Little minds with a little power' is how I see most I run into.

          With all of that said I do think every individual deserves to be given the benefit of the doubt while waiting for evidence to come to light.

          1. MizBejabbers profile image89
            MizBejabbersposted 8 days ago in reply to this

            LTL, from what I've seen, America now has the attitude "guilty until proven innocent." I agree with you on body cameras. Some people feel that they are a violation of one's privacy, but in today's atmosphere, it seems like they are needed very badly. Many years ago, my father-in-law was mayor of a small town in West Texas, and my mother-in-law made the statement about the town's police, "if he weren't a policeman, he'd be a thug." Sadly, it seems today that thugs can be police.

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

          Your opinion as to why they shot her?  Because cops are kill crazy, always looking for an excuse to pull the trigger and kill a human being?

          1. Will Apse profile image89
            Will Apseposted 8 days ago in reply to this

            Most cops are armed. It is the nature of the population that they police that determines how trigger happy they are.

            Even when bad cultures develop within police forces, you can usually trace it back to wider trends.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

              Did this then happen in a gang ridden neighborhood?  Was the woman carrying gang markers?  Was she armed, popping up out of virtual nowhere to surprise the cops?

              While I definitely agree with what you said, I'm just as definitely convinced there is far more to this story that we've heard to date.  Lots more.

              1. Will Apse profile image89
                Will Apseposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                When people's lives are insecure there will always be a lot of anxiety in the air. Many US policies promote insecurity.

                Add the ready availability of guns, and you are mixing full blown fear with the anxiety.

                Japan has more or less eliminated guns from civilian life in the last few years. The yakuza is losing membership fast because it is hard to terrorise ordinary folk without guns (ordinary folk fight back).

                The police are struggling to find a new role as crime drops, too.

                https://www.economist.com/news/asia/217 … olice-hunt


                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

                  You seem to be equating large numbers of gun owners with large amounts of crime, particularly murder.  Unfortunately for the hypothesis, it isn't borne out in real life; there is zero correlation between the number of guns in a society and its homicide rate.  I can't truly speak for robberies except to note that in areas/towns with high numbers of guns the robbery rate tends to drop:  thieves aren't quite so willing to break in when there is a high likelihood that there is a gun in the house.

                  I WILL agree, however, that guns breed fear, however irrational it may be.  Our politicians and media have made sure of that, as has those already afraid and social media.  Very few people actually take the time to LOOK at what guns mean to a society, instead accepting the fear mongering at face value.

                  1. Will Apse profile image89
                    Will Apseposted 7 days ago in reply to this

                    Of course I am equating the large number of gun owners with the large amount of crime. When guns are widely available every bad guy wants one and can get one very quickly.

                    Many crimes are impossible without guns. Try holding up a bank or store without one. Try murdering someone without one, it gets a lot, lot harder.

                    Any scrawny youth can be a gangster with a gun. Without a gun he is just a punk you hit over the head with the first thing that comes to hand (I ain't no pacifist, lol).

                    I live in a country with high levels of gun ownership and people live in fear of teenagers. You might think that is pathetic. I certainly do. But it is wise to avoid reprimanding troublesome kids because there is a significant chance they will go get a gun and shoot you.

                    1500 gun murders by under 18 year olds last year.

                    Guns are poisonous. They corrode all the normal social mechanisms of maintaining a decent society.

              2. Marisa Wright profile image94
                Marisa Wrightposted 7 days ago in reply to this
                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

                  I'm a little shaky (or a lot shaky) at this point in accepting a coroners report that not only was the cause of death a bullet, but that that bullet was fired illegally.  Hard to understand how a coroner, without knowing what happened or why it happened considers himself knowledgeable enough to declare it a homicide.

                  1. Will Apse profile image89
                    Will Apseposted 7 days ago in reply to this

                    Coroner = elitist expert = not to be trusted.

                    Elect Trump again, lol.

                    On a previous issue, this: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/fire … and-death/


                    'Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide'

                    But that was before Japan more or less eliminated gun ownership in the civilian population. Their data is very impressive. No guns = much less crime of all kinds. Especially organised crime that relies on intimidation, and robbery that relies on guns.

                    One thing you can be sure of, trigger happy cops destroy community faith in police. Which makes catching criminals far harder.

                    And of course, if cops are scared for their lives in any area (because guns are prevalent) they will be a lot less effective for the obvious reason... the focus is on surviving the shift.

          2. ptosis profile image78
            ptosisposted 5 days ago in reply to this

            Yes, you are quite correct. But there is much more than that. Everyday lying:

            Body camera video produced Wednesday appears to show a Baltimore police officer plant drugs

            Annie Dookhan is a former chemist of a Massachusetts crime lab who admitted to falsifying evidence, affecting up to 34,000 cases.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions … 0600cbdd67

            https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/5 … t-to-coast


        3. MizBejabbers profile image89
          MizBejabbersposted 8 days ago in reply to this

          Will, unfortunately you are right. But if a person is running toward a cop and calling for help, he or she should be able to rely on the officer for help, not be gunned down because she is carrying a cell phone or a wallet in her hand. Does he/she have to drop a possession and drop to the ground with hands raised to get help? What are cities hiring for police officers these days, chicken shits or thugs?

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 8 days ago in reply to this

            "Does he/she have to drop a possession and drop to the ground with hands raised to get help?"

            Depending on circumstances, could be.  A very good way to get killed it to convince an already nervous cop that you are a threat.

            We hire men and women.  Men and women with families.  With kids, with siblings.  Men and women that wish to see tomorrow, to see their kids grow up.  We don't hire robots, we don't hire supermen that can't be hurt or killed.  We don't hire people that never feel fear, and we don't hire either computers or crystal balls that can instantly evaluate all situations and predict with certainty what's going to happen in the next 2 seconds.  We might wish we did, we might expect we do and we might even think we do.  But we don't.  We hire people.  People like you and like me.

            1. MizBejabbers profile image89
              MizBejabbersposted 7 days ago in reply to this

              No, not like me. If I knew someone called for help and was running toward me crying for help, I certainly would not shoot them. That's crazy.

              Who are you going to shoot with a cell phone? It is logical that a person might be still carrying the phone they used to call for help. These cops are nuts. Recently the Memphis Police Department came to Little Rock (where I live) on a recruiting trip because they can't get enough qualified applicants from their area. At least that's what the news story said. It is unfortunate that sane people don't want to be police officers anymore. Backing up trigger happy cops does not help. This isn't the wild west where they shoot first and ask questions later.

              Besides, an update on the story said that the woman was standing beside the patrol car talking to the officer-driver when the officer-passenger shot her.  Apparently the shooter didn't give time to investigate her story, and she didn't even own a gun. How can you make excuses for that? That isn't human nature!

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 7 days ago in reply to this

                Really?  You get a report of an attack in an alley.  You arrive and someone darts out that alley pointing a gun at you while screaming unintelligibly and you won't take steps to protect yourself? 

                No, you don't get to claim that someone running towards you in the dark with an unknown object in hand is obviously not carrying a gun.  Not in the 1/2 second you have to make the call. Nor do you get to claim that you know she doesn't own a gun.  It's amazing how we just assume that knowledge hours, days or weeks after an incident was all known to the cop at the time and should have been taken into account, isn't it?

                Of course, while you may believe the lady was quietly standing along the police car conversing with the other cop, I don't.  But neither do I "make excuses" - I'll leave that until the full facts are known, and will continue to suggest that everyone else do the same.

                1. MizBejabbers profile image89
                  MizBejabbersposted 6 days ago in reply to this

                  Oh, for crying out loud. She was standing by the car talking to the driver when the passenger cop shot her. You are taking ridiculous steps to try to justify that. It's obvious you are going to justify cop shootings everywhere. Will you do that if it happens to your wife, daughter or girlfriend?

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

                    "She was standing by the car talking to the driver when the passenger cop shot her."

                    So you indicated, or at least indicated that's what you heard/read somewhere.  It's not what I heard, and I trust you can understand that the "ridiculous steps" are being made by making claims that cannot be supported.  All I've done is present an alternative possibility - a possibility that cannot be refuted at this time because no one knows what went down.  And that's the point; everything we hear is only a possibility.

                    Yes, I trust that if my loved one is shot by cops I will wait until I find out what happened before making statements I can't support or assigning blame.  Some of us do that - some of us assume that the cop is a kill crazy madman.

            2. Nathanville profile image90
              Nathanvilleposted 6 days ago in reply to this

              Wilderness, you said…

              “A very good way to get killed is to convince an already nervous cop that you are a threat.”

              I say... only in America; in other countries around the world the situation is handled differently, and innocent people are not killed by the police.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

                Of course they aren't.  Not in N Korea, not in Russia, not in Saudi Arabia.  Not even in the UK or France.  Innocent people are never, ever killed anywhere in the world but the US.

                Say what you wish, it doesn't make it true.

              2. Nathanville profile image90
                Nathanvilleposted 5 days ago in reply to this

                Wilderness, FYI; in separate incidences, in the UK between 1920 and 1999 the police killed 27 people, and from 2000 to 2017 the police killed 42 people.

                From 1920 to 2017 multiple deaths in a single incident = 29; which includes 17 during the Irish civil war of the 1920s, the 5 people killed by police in a single incident during the IRA (Irish Republican Army) terrorist campaign in the UK from 1969 to 1999, and the three ISIS terrorists shot dead by police in London in June 2017.

                Grand Total since 1920 (27+42+29) = 98 people killed by British police in 97 years, an average of about one police killing per year in the UK.

                While in contrast, in the USA the police kill on average about 2.5 people per day e.g. the American police kill more people in six weeks than the British police have killed in a whole Century.

                The British police are well trained in ‘de-escalation’ techniques to defuse the situation and minimise people being shot; plus in the UK 95.6% of the British police are un-armed anyway.  While in America, all too often, the police ‘shoot to kill first, and ask questions later’.

                These are undeniable facts, so yes they are true.

                UK Police Arrest Knife Wielding Man without Firing a Shot https://youtu.be/7fvbcBZQ_9c

                1. m-a-w-g profile image82
                  m-a-w-gposted 2 days ago in reply to this

                  I would agree in general terms fatality being higher but would listen to a more unbiased approach.  Such as taking into account the HUGE difference population.
                  But if guns were the true issue, then our own armed forces would have destroyed themselves.  Or are they an exception to the rule?
                  - USA single parent families: 12,000,000 Below poverty level 40%
                  -UK single parent families: 2,000,000 Below poverty level 47%

                  1. Nathanville profile image90
                    Nathanvilleposted 41 hours ago in reply to this

                    The UK population is 65.5 million, the USA population is 326.6 million; which is about 5 times greater.  Therefore if you multiply the 1 person on average per year killed by police in the UK by 5 to scale it up to the size of the American population, then you get 5.  5 people killed in the UK per year would still be significant smaller than the 1,000 people killed in the USA by American police.

            3. Castlepaloma profile image25
              Castlepalomaposted 4 days ago in reply to this

              Really do you think I am a criminal or could they be policing for profit.
              I'm the first person I have meet who got a jay walking and sleeping in truck ticket in my life. A seat belt phobia test was refused by the police before and afterward for this ticket. Because I do my own test safety on seat belts and find it is a cash grab for car manufacturers and not safer.   

              Worst crime I could have been lock up for yet not. Was smoking pot at a party. Since marijuana is illegal in every country in the world that is force by Americans. Only Uruguay it is legal. Then I must have created a crime against humanity. Since pot is public enemy number 1 STILL, I should choose a death penalty. How about a firing swad, no no Hurts TOO MUCH.

              This better, First suck on the devils c*ck then I prefer death by LSD and a hooker, they can arrest me for that illegal process, what do care.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                You said it, not me.  You violated the law, you agree you violated the law (assuming you paid the ticket without a court fight).  Guess that makes you a criminal, 'cause you don't get to decide which laws to obey and which to disobey.

                Me, too, though - I often drive +5 mph and I did pay a traffic ticket in 1994.

                1. Castlepaloma profile image25
                  Castlepalomaposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                  I am sure we are all criminals and suspected terrorist. It all works well for Satan corperation Agenda 21 plan.

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 4 days ago in reply to this

                    Well, we could just abolish all laws that someone, somewhere, doesn't like.  No more criminals, but I'm not sure I would want to live there...

          2. Castlepaloma profile image25
            Castlepalomaposted 6 days ago in reply to this

            What I do, when a bear is on top of me, lay there, play dead. People have become more afraid of the cops begging for money than the criminals .

  4. Nathanville profile image90
    Nathanvilleposted 8 days ago

    Perhaps this video might answer some of these questions, while at the same time raising other questions:-

    Hard-Wire: Law of The Gun | Documentary: https://youtu.be/66pr23xUKZc

  5. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 6 days ago


    963 people killed by cops in US in 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics … ings-2016/

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 6 days ago in reply to this

      Points out that we do a pretty darn good job of stopping terrorism, doesn't it?

    2. Nathanville profile image90
      Nathanvilleposted 5 days ago in reply to this

      Yep wilderness, and it also points out how lethal your guns are.

  6. Castlepaloma profile image25
    Castlepalomaposted 4 days ago

    When we have to look over our shoulder more for cops than criminal. We have lost our freedom and our security.

    After all police, courts and troops are the most employed groups of people in the World even more than Wal-Mart employees. At least they have a job, OH My God!  don't take the food stamps and the pensions away.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 4 days ago in reply to this

      Good thing we're nowhere near that yet, isn't it?  At least we don't if we're not a criminal - I have yet to look around for a cop unless I suspected foul play in the very near future.

      1. Castlepaloma profile image25
        Castlepalomaposted 4 days ago in reply to this

        Let see, in Saskatchewan  I got a $400 fine for sleeping in my truck, when I pull over for a wail from driving I was sleepy. A $250 Jay walking when there was no other cars in sight. a Seatbelt costing me 3 point and $400, that's just is in one year. The only one I deserved (yet not really it was a very important call) was $200 cell phone when driving.

        I took the police to court over a construction speed trap and won. Most people can't afford to take off work and go to court to fight off Police wrong doing.  It's all about policing for profit it is the same for the US Troops and some of them are honest ones who admit they are the true terrorist.

        Another reason I have to leave Canada because I caught them on a dozen unlawful acts of policing for profit. They are a danger to me, they can easily get away with murder more than anyone except Trump. Cost from Crime, got mugged for $20 of food and other odds and ends of $100 over my entire life. Greatest crooks are the Government and Corporations every single day.

        In my youth when police were respectful they gave warnings most often and went most after violent crime. Today Police say ignorance is no accuse of the law so you better be a lawyer at the wheel. The only caught 1% of the real crimes wail spending vast majority of their time patrolling the streets and buildings. How could you compare a finger on a trigger of a useless gun. Other then to kill or practice for fun to kill. Vs. a cannbis plant, extremely useful plant for 50,000 products.

        They would be far more successful investing each crime site, but that would be too hard like an honest cop would do. If I was being mugged and was able to report during the fight. I would lie in order so they would not harmed me further by saying I think they are selling pot.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 4 days ago in reply to this

          So you committed crimes and therefore watch out for cops.  Don't commit crimes then!

  7. Jana Louise Smit profile image86
    Jana Louise Smitposted 2 days ago

    It is really not fair to lump everybody in one profession as "bad" because of the behaviour of some of them, even if the numbers are alarming. There are excellent cops in the U.S. and the world for that matter. I agree, in this case, the bullet was fired too quickly. However this is not a reason to call all cops a nuisance.

    1. ptosis profile image78
      ptosisposted 2 days ago in reply to this

      You accepted the old "bad apple theory" which is misleading because there is a edifice of silence.  Ignoring the "Thin Blue Line" and what it entails. Some police departments were accused of using the rotten apple theory to minimize backlash against corruption.

      One bad apple doesn't emerge in a vacuum.  Police work by its very nature involves the slippery slope (the potential for gradual deterioration of social-moral inhibitions and perceived sense of permissibility for deviant conduct).

      1. Castlepaloma profile image25
        Castlepalomaposted 2 days ago in reply to this

        I personally had not only had my artistic career and industry harmed but also my environmental career destroyed in Canada and the US. Due to super high corruption in the Government and Justice system.  To the point I became a part time investigator and security supervisor to get to the bottom of these Dream killer, synthetic and  slave/hierarchy economy criminals.

        Resolve- my aim to serve humanity is better served on another continent.

        1. ptosis profile image78
          ptosisposted 30 hours ago in reply to this

          What is interesting to me is the rolling back of protections from the police under Jeff Session DOJ who wants increased used of civil forfeitures.

          Adoptive forfeitures:
          "24 states have passed laws that restrict or prohibit civil forfeiture, but that local law enforcement can now circumvent these laws by relinquishing seized assets to the federal government, instead of returning them to owners—even those who have never been charged with a crime. Known as “adoption,” this strategy has allowed the federal government to take more than $1 billion in assets over the last 10 years." - https://qz.com/1033545/civil-forfeiture … ral-power/

          Or it could be "The Justice Department's inspector general found that civil-asset forfeitures took in nearly $28 billion in the last decade. " - http://www.businessinsider.com/civil-as … icy-2017-7

          I read the above to mean that 1 bill from states adoptive forfeiture and the 27 bill is direct from the Feds civil forfeiture.

          "Instead of revising forfeiture practices in a manner to better protect Americans' due process rights, the DOJ seems determined to lose in court before it changes its policies for the better," said Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.

          "Civil asset forfeiture is unjust and unconstitutional," tweeted Republican Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan. "It's a big-government scheme to take people's property without due process. End it."

          Texas Court Says There's No Remedy For Person Whose Vehicle Was Subjected To Civil Forfeiture After An Illegal Search -  https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160 … arch.shtml

          Please note this is about civil asset forfeiture not criminal asset forfeiture  - so please don't hijack this post to talk about criminal asset forfeiture . 

          Section 7. {No Civil Asset Forfeiture} (A) There is no civil asset forfeiture. Section 8. {Rule of lenity}

          (A) The court shall resolve any ambiguity in this chapter relating to the State taking property through asset forfeiture in favor of the property owner. - https://www.alec.org/model-policy/asset … ction-act/

          This system — where police can seize property with limited judicial oversight and retain it for their own use — has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses. According to one nationally publicized report, for example, police in the town of Tenaha, Texas, regularly seized the property of out-of-town drivers passing through and collaborated with the district attorney to coerce them into signing waivers of their property rights. In one case, local officials threatened to file unsubstantiated felony charges against a Latino driver and his girlfriend and to place their children in foster care unless they signed a waiver. In another, they seized a black plant worker’s car and all his property (including cash he planned to use for dental work), jailed him for a night, forced him to sign away his property, and then released him on the side of the road without a phone or money. He was forced to walk to a Wal-Mart, where he borrowed a stranger’s phone to call his mother, who had to rent a car to pick him up. These forfeiture operations frequently target the poor and other groups least able to defend their interests in forfeiture proceedings. Perversely, these same groups are often the most burdened by forfeiture. They are more likely to use cash than alternative forms of payment, like credit cards, which may be less susceptible to forfeiture. And they are more likely to suffer in their daily lives while they litigate for the return of a critical item of property, such as a car or a home. The issue, USSC Justice Thomas wrote, is "whether modern civil-forfeiture statutes can be squared with the Due Process Clause and our Nation’s history.”  Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 … nce-thomas


          'Utah is one of just a few states in the country to require an annual report on asset forfeiture. 400 forfeiture cases in Utah during 2016, with cash being seized in 99 percent of those cases.

          Cops like to publicize such busts because it feeds a narrative that asset forfeiture is used primarily against big-time drug dealers. But they're rather out of the ordinary, the report shows.

          Most forfeitures (69 percent) take place during traffic stops and most of the time only money is seized. According to the state report, cash was taken in 99 percent of forfeitures during 2016, with the median seizure amounting to only $1,031.

          That means, in many cases, the amount seized was considerably less than four-figures. In one instance, the report shows, police took $16 from a motorist.' -   Elsewhere in Chicago, cops have seized as little as 34 cents from motorists http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/15/repor … e-just-103

          What compelling reason does the State have in seizing 34 cents without economic due process? This highway robbery and state brigandage. These are not Centurions merely upholding the law but Tax Revenuers of the most disgustingly obnoxious type.


          And that just the start:

          " A review of Ferguson’s financial statements indicates that court fine collections now account for one-fifth of total operating revenue. The St. Louis suburb of about 21,000 residents took in more than $2.5 million in municipal court revenue last fiscal year, representing an 80 percent increase from only two years prior, when fines netted about $1.4 million." - http://www.governing.com/topics/public- … udget.html

          "Folks have the impression that this is a form of low-level harassment that isn't about public safety. It's about money," - Thomas Harvey

          The millions of dollars in fines and fees paid by black residents served an ultimate goal of satisfying "revenue rather than public safety needs," the U.S. Justice Department found.


          "Many states, including Nevada, have faced budget shortfalls since the Great Recession began. But this one isn’t caused by a decline in tax revenue, but by a decline in traffic tickets, which provide the majority of funding to the state supreme court. “Now with all due respect to the citizens of Nevada, I don’t think anyone is driving better,” Hardesty told legislators. “I think the truth is we’re seeing less traffic violations because law enforcement’s priorities have changed and it has changed dramatically.” - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … es/389387/

          Does DOJ Jeff Session  think civil forfeiture is a good, fair idea? 

          "Maybe Sessions’ enthusiasm for getting the federal government back into the business of civil forfeiture is just the logical result of a worldview that treats all police officers as righteous agents of order and all suspects as presumptively deserving of punishment. It’s the same worldview that has led Sessions to dismiss painstaking DOJ research into unconstitutional police practices in Chicago as “anecdotal,” to claim marijuana users are by definition not “good people,” to shut down the National Commission on Forensic Science, and to demand that federal prosecutors always seek the most severe prison terms possible when bringing cases." http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ … ve_it.html

          USSC": Not a Violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-8729.ZO.html


          1. Castlepaloma profile image25
            Castlepalomaposted 27 hours ago in reply to this

            We are experiencing the third wave; the beginning of the dirty thirty’s where the Government steal farms & property from the people.  For example  this man who owned a 1miilion ½ $ prosperity estate. Then the police wanted that estate, so they assumed he had marijuana grow op. The raided his home and shot him to death. They found no grow-op of marijuana in his house. The Police reprocessed all the owner procession and property anyways. They general start with the poorer of résistance and work their way up.  They pull me over driving to tell me they looking for terrorist and drugs to keep us safe. What keeps me safe from them, as they serve themselves.

          2. GA Anderson profile image86
            GA Andersonposted 26 hours ago in reply to this

            You should put this in its own thread ptosis, it would make a lively discussion. I heard a brief blurb about it recently, but have not followed up. But would be glad to participate in a discussion of this Sessions' decision. My uninformed opinion is that it is probably unconstitutional.


            1. ptosis profile image78
              ptosisposted 13 hours ago in reply to this

              The USSC is willing to listen to a case that is 'ripe', Or the do-nothing Congress could ban it altogether.

              Been trying to get rid of it for years, but again, the Congress doesn't do anything H. Rept. 106-192 - CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE REFORM ACT

    2. Castlepaloma profile image25
      Castlepalomaposted 32 hours ago in reply to this

      Not a nuisance, hey.

      American has more guns than People and tens X the guns than the US military. Talking to many American about Firearms and how they kill more people, I get this glaze In their eyes.

      The 1st amendment can tell their 2 amendment to Fu*k off, you’re hurting people. They wrote the 2nd amendment when they just had musket and balls. Some say we need guns to protect ourselves from the US military, yet now the Military has drones and nukes ready for civil war and world war. What we have here is police and troops policing at home and overseas for profit. Very little about protecting you or me.

      I never call a cops for protection, best to have your own system, a family to protect,  blood or a group who cares. If a criminal steals your TV, your second or greater cost is the US court system if you can hunt the first con down. Driving fines and tax payer for police patrolling is great profit, an investigating cost them to much money. When they pull ME over in my truck, I ask what is the nature of your investigation? Then hand over my investigator licence, it often makes them numb or nerves as hell..

  8. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 days ago

    Thats too bad, CP. Maybe you could continue to do your "serving of humanity" here or in Canada if you used the barter system. ? (and stop using the word "career.")
    Might as well start with you. We're gonna have to get barter-savvy soon, if you ask me …
    which no one ...

    1. Castlepaloma profile image25
      Castlepalomaposted 2 days ago in reply to this

      Mix barter with tax system. Yes lifestyle is a better is word, if most understood that way of thinking.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image86
        Kathryn L Hillposted 2 days ago in reply to this

        I don't know how they would mix. Do you? If you are not making money, you won't be taxed.

        1. MizBejabbers profile image89
          MizBejabbersposted 33 hours ago in reply to this

          Not true in the U.S. if you get caught, Kathryn, the IRS taxes the barter system. You are supposed to each report the value of the work you  bartered. Then each reports the value as income. For instance, if Mary caters a lunch for John and his friends because John repairs her front porch, each is supposed to report it as income. This is a ridiculous law, but it is in the IRS publication. To the IRS there is no such thing as neighbors helping each other tit for tat. Most people, of course, don't report it. It would then be up to the IRS to discover and prove it.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image25
            Castlepalomaposted 32 hours ago in reply to this

            Out of the 600 games of life we could play.  Tit for Tat is the best game that I can imagine playing, and we are not allowed to play it because it is a win/win..  Where Chess is the game we end up playing where there is always a win/loser. Then we start again with suffering many losers and where only few winners lead the competitive game vs. a co-operative game

  9. Will Apse profile image89
    Will Apseposted 38 hours ago

    Minneapolis cops kill perfectly harmless dogs, too.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-can … s-two-dogs

    1. Castlepaloma profile image25
      Castlepalomaposted 35 hours ago in reply to this

      Having a debate about Guns & terrorist with too many Americans, is like talking to creationist about Man coexisted with dinosaurs. I don't about the coexistence of dinosaur. But I do know about traveling all state except one and a 100 countries. When American have more gun than people and they have ten x the guns than the military.  My BS detector, hits the roof. I feel safer with the veterinarian raptor.

      Firearms kill more people than Aids, wars, illegal drug and terrorist combined.

      Some try to justified caveman killed more with a brunt object and hammer evolved, thus killing more than guns.  Fist, feet and hand kill more than gun. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. If not guns, it's something else.

      Too bad numbers don't lie.

      A Hammer Gross, that’s too personal to beat a man into a hamburger. Does plant kill people? Why is pot Public enemy no 1.  More illegal than terrorist worldwide.  Why not fill jails with terrorist, rather than pothead. Why only 13% of criminal are in jail for violent crimes, it was mostly violent criminal in jail when I a young man . Now we have Authoritarian killing more of the public than the public KILLING the public.

      Is it me or is this policing for profit both troops and police as being the most employed on the earth. Should WE be terrorized about terrorist or them?

  10. neshta profile image58
    neshtaposted 18 hours ago

    The excuse given for shooting the woman is flimsy,it is a total lack of value and hatred for human life that can cause such kind of an attitude.