Comments on: January 15 roundup

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:03:56 +0000

“Often, the public reason given for keeping someone’s cash is the discovery trace amounts of drug residue on the bills.”

This is completely unrequired. If you have over X in cash on your person, and you don’t have a very specific reason (armored vehicle for banks, basically), the government can simply confiscate it, no matter what your claimed intentions. No reason on the government’s part is required.

You thn have the privilege of attempting to prove to the government’s satisfaction that you had that money for legitimate purpose. Good luck with that.

By: AZFlyer

AZFlyer — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:18:56 +0000

These seizures of “suspected drug money” I find completely offensive. Often, the public reason given for keeping someone’s cash is the discovery trace amounts of drug residue on the bills. Not mentioning that testing would reveal trace amounts of drug residue on about 1/2 of all U.S. currency in circulation.

Several years ago, at a press conference touting the technology the enabled the “drug testing” of cash, a random $20 bill from the local county attorney’s pocket tested positive on live TV. Oddly, neither the County Attorney, nor the Sherriff (standing next to him) found this to be a problem.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:23:51 +0000

Regarding the cash seizure: that is the law of the land. Basically, if you have cash over a certain amount, the government assumes it is for an illicit purpose and takes it. How this withstands the slightest scrutiny from the courts is beyond me, save that the courts are simply corrupt.