jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (10 posts)

civil forfeiture, Arizona Legislature passed HB 2477, write to Gov.

  1. ptosis profile image76
    ptosisposted 5 months ago

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13486894.jpg
    Did you know that in Arizona law enforcement agencies use a system called civil asset forfeiture to take and keep peoples' homes, businesses, cash, cars and other property on the mere suspicion it is involved with criminal activity? This is true even if the owner is never convicted — or even charged — with a crime.

    Fortunately, the Legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill (HB 2477) that now sits on Gov. Ducey's desk that would significantly reform Arizona's civil asset forfeiture system. Please contact the governor now and tell him to sign this important measure.

    If HB 2477 becomes law, police and prosecutors will be required to report publicly what property they have seized. They will also have to go through an approval process before making any purchases with the proceeds of seized property.

    These are huge steps forward. But Gov. Ducey is being lobbied hard by prosecutors and law enforcement agencies to veto HB 2477 because they want to continue reaping the financial benefits of an unregulated civil asset forfeiture system. Contact Gov. Ducey now and tell him to approve HB 2477. We need to make our voices heard.

    The forfeiture reforms in HB 2477 will also make it easier for Arizonans' to challenge the seizure of their property, force the government to make a solid case if a seizure is contested, and eliminates loopholes that currently allow local law enforcement agencies to circumvent state law related to forfeiture.

    We have to make sure powerful prosecutors and police chiefs do not drown out our voices. Email Gov. Ducey now and tell him to sign HB 2477.

    This bill addresses a number of problems with the current civil asset forfeiture scheme and moves Arizona in the right direction on transparency, accountability, and due process. Please urge Gov. Ducey to sign HB 2477.

    https://ssl.capwiz.com/aclu/issues/aler … f6S1abo%3D

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      I think there is some kind of forfeiture law in nearly every, if not every state.  I also think it has gone way too far; when a landlord can lose their property because they didn't violate the law weekly and search the tenants belongings for drug equipment, it has crossed the line.

    2. mike102771 profile image85
      mike102771posted 5 months ago in reply to this

      How is it constitutional for the State of AZ to seize property without due process? I could see if they could prove guilt but from what you typed it seems they can do this without cause.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        Get caught poaching deer and your car and gun can be confiscated.  Trial is set for several months away, by which time the impound fees for the car are more than it's worth.

        I lived in Virginia in a gated community where many of the homes were rentals, often with the owner several states away.  One was used as a meth lab by the renter, and was confiscated when the dealer was arrested.  The poor owner had to bid in the auction to get it back - used in drug trafficking it was forfeit, and it didn't matter WHO committed the crime.

        I don't think such things are legal, either, but apparently the courts, law makers and judges disagree with me.

        1. mike102771 profile image85
          mike102771posted 5 months ago in reply to this

          It seems like the laws are set so that you are guilty first no matter if you did anything or not. It's like how bail and trials bankrupt people just defending their innocence or they take a plea to keep from losing everything. They shouldn't be able to charge a fee for impound if you are found innocent. It's like the gov stole the car then charged the victim to get it back. If it wasn't the gov that would be called extortion

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 5 months ago in reply to this

            Worse; it can be, and often is, a major source of funding to the department that confiscates it.  Can you say "Abuse", with a capital "A"?

  2. ahorseback profile image48
    ahorsebackposted 5 months ago

    I think you guys are conveniently forgetting that reality of today's court litigation's ----Get arrested in a major crime ?   By the time that conveniently orchestrated trial delays are used up , The property ,properties that could have paid for part of court costs etc.  , are sold , traded , liquidated , hidden , or otherwise  lost to  paying for the "peoples ' tax dollar , cost of our justice system .

    For too long America has been a haven for crime , criminal , drug , blue collar , corporate , government ,  Civil forfeiture is but one tool to slow the incredible drain on our  economic system !

    1. ptosis profile image76
      ptosisposted 5 months ago in reply to this

      Are you being willfully ignorant again?  Why are you doing that? I know you are smart, so why act dumb?

      Civil forfeiture in the United States, sometimes called civil judicial forfeiture or occasionally civil seizure, is a controversial legal process in which law enforcement officers take assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.

      1. ahorseback profile image48
        ahorsebackposted 5 months ago in reply to this

        The willful ignorance is more your own  .   Big difference between "controversial "  and legal .   I always look at it this way , One has nothing to fear from the laws of this country unless one crosses the lines  of said laws .

        Willful ignorance ; sounds like  mindless anti -authority for the sake of being anti-authority  . What happened some patrol cop take your bong ?

        Here's your sign.!

        1. ptosis profile image76
          ptosisposted 5 months ago in reply to this

          You did it again, about the bong comment, belittling a person's political and legal questioning.  Wow. Civil mean the person is not charged at all, the money is, how many times does one have to repeat the difference that you are so willfully ignoring? Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil  Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil Civil

 
working