Shroomism said:

doesn't this infuriate anyone else?

Even so much as HEARING about stuff like this makes me want to go on a rampage..

there's so much wrong with our country already... and they want to go and pull a police state on us? not bloody likely. Go around fucking people up the ass and not saying please or thank you and taking away natural human rights and everyone is sitting around with their thumb up their ass saying please sir may I have another.

#Why isn't everyone pissed?
Why isn't there a riot in the streets right now?!


TV and propoganda has created a country of lazy, self-righteous, passive agressive fucks

---

Quote:

Congress is set to pass the "Methamphetamine Anti-Proliferation Act," which will allow police to conduct "secret searches and seizures" -- meaning they can search a home, make copies of material such as computer files, and leave, without ever telling the occupant they were there. The bill will also make it a crime to tell someone how to make drugs or indicate where they can buy drug paraphernalia. Even creating a link on a Web site that directs people to such information would be a criminal act.

---

Quote:

Of the drug war's many assaults on American civil liberties, perhaps the most extreme is what is called civil asset forfeiture. Ordinarily, property is only seized after its owner is charged and convicted of a crime and the property can be shown to be the fruits of that crime. Civil asset forfeiture, however, does away with the need to prove the owner's guilt. To seize any sort of property, police simply have to show that the property was somehow connected to illegal drugs. To do that, the police must meet only a civil law standard of proof -- a far lower standard than that required to convict someone of a crime. It doesn't matter if the owner of the property is never convicted of a crime, or never even charged with a crime. In 80 per cent of forfeitures, in fact, charges are never laid.

Civil asset forfeiture is based on the medieval legal notion that the property itself is "guilty." (In medieval law, animals, too, could be guilty. Cows, goats, and other barnyard animals were occasionally put on trial. Some were executed.) Thus, it's even irrelevant that the owner didn't know the property was used for criminal activities or tried to stop those activities. A Kansas couple who owned and operated a motel had their business taken by the government in 1999 because drug sales had taken place on the property -- even though the couple had nothing to do with the drug sales and had installed floodlights and fences in an effort to keep drug traffickers away from their property.

Until the drug war, civil asset forfeiture was almost a dead letter, "anachronistic residue," as Ira Glasser puts it. But in 1970, and again in 1984, the concept was revived as a way of hitting drug traffickers without the difficulty of proving them guilty of crimes. Police forces were even allowed to keep the proceeds of forfeiture, leading to wild enthusiasm for its use across the United States. The return of this medieval concept to modern American law, says Mr. Glasser, is entirely due to drug prohibition.

---