AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 151
  • Posts: 19265
August 24th, 2016 at 6:39:19 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

Almost never, except for far out on the highway, and when holding a ton of cash in a car....

Police who answer a burglary or nuisance call at a business location, or at home in a city location are extremely safe, and this is obviously a lot different than a lone trouper pulling over a lone driver with an unexplainable bundle of cash on an empty highway, especially in a car smelling of pot.

The thing is, driving down a highway very far from any nearby city, with an absolute fortune in cash found in your car, is absolutely and extremely unexplainable. It'll simply be seized. He may very well think the large amount of cash you carry is from drug trafficking, and he will seize it for the state on an empty country road.
The cash might - probably will - never be seen again.

This is different than a city burglary cop, looking at a broken lock or window at your house in the city.

WTF you talking about "driving down a highway very far from any nearby city" I happens all over INCLUDING AIRPORTS, BUS STATIONS etc etc. All nearby major cities. People have had very good explainable reasons. IE. A known car collector bids on a classic car on eBay, Its blatantly obvious why he has the money, yet they take his money (PLEASE READ AND WATCH SOME VIDEOS ) And remember a large amount of incidences we never hear about.

Quit telling us what we already know. We all know we shouldn't be traveling with large amounts of cash, especially on deserted highways where known drug money is often being trafficked. That's not the point the point is they shouldn't have a law that allows and encourages them to take peoples money. ONLY under an extreme situation where there's ample evidence the money is used for illegal activity should they be allowed to take it. If someone has a criminal history of selling drugs, laundering money and running cash, if the money is packed in the tires of the truck along with cocaine, guns and 5 illegals hidden in the back..... fine.

But when a guy gets in a fight with his girlfriend/wife and he grabs his saving of 15k from the safe because shes going crazy(who knows perhaps she will torch the house) jumps in his RV starts driving (perhaps on his way to the bank) gets pulled over and the police confiscate it, that's BS. That's not that far fetched. You say don't cry me a river, well something similar happened to a 61 year old man suffering from stage IV cancer.

I don't care how rare you think it is It shouldn't be allowed encouraged or accepted. One time is to many times.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Wizardofnothing
Wizardofnothing
Joined: Jul 3, 2015
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 3493
August 24th, 2016 at 8:25:12 AM permalink
I just went through airport now and my bag got flagged for an electric razor wtf- and when they looked into the travel pouch there was 10k- The tsa guard just said - where you headed I said Vegas- and he said try not to loose it all the first day!!
No longer hiring, don’t ask because I won’t hire you either
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
August 24th, 2016 at 8:33:38 AM permalink
Quote: Joeshlabotnik

So far, I haven't seen any proof that the phenomenon that everybody is getting so exercised about--cops seizing the money of innocent law -abiding citizens and their never never ever ever getting it back--actually exists. What I've seen are a few internet anecdotes, blog posts, and video podcasts. While corrupt cops may indeed be roaming the land , looking for cash like brains-starved zombies, I doubt it. It seems much more likely to be an internet meme. And a great way for hubby to explain why he's coming home from the casino flat broke: "gee, honey, I won five grand tonight, but the cops took it all!" In other words, I don't take internet tales at face value.

That aside, anyone who travels in a car, plane, train, boat, or on a skateboard with large sums of cash is an idiot and is asking for trouble. Having the cops take your cash--however likely that is--is only one of dozens of things that could go wrong.

And as far as that tired American Freedom argument goes, well, I have the right to set fire to myself, and any law prohibiting me from doing that is a grievous infringement of my somethingth amendment rights. But you still would be right to ask me, "Legal or illegal, why in earth would you want to do it?"



PGD and nearly everyone sure sound like we are in Mexico, Columbia or other parts of the world where police (and perhaps judges also) bribery & corruption run rampage.

Yes, there are bad cops, but police bribery & corruption is nearly non-existence here in the U.S (we do have VERY serious problem about police brutality and subsequent cover up, but it is a different topic).

What value do you put on the convenience when factoring in the risk?

I look at the risk, and the convenience and the value of my time, and in the end I choose the convenience & the value of time that give me hassle free and instantaneous access to my money anytime and anywhere during travel over the very low risk of having my money illegally or legally confiscated by a corrupted cop or law enforcement personnel/agency.

And speaking of police brutality and subsequent cover up issue, my impression is that people here seems to side with police and find ways to defend their "good cop" through the “to protect and to serve” logic. But when it comes to the issue of money seizure, which is all about bribery & corruption issue, then everyone is suspicious of their “to protect and to serve” duty, and yells “bad cop! bad cop! bad cop!” Why?
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
August 24th, 2016 at 8:43:11 AM permalink
Quote: Wizardofnothing

I just went through airport now and my bag got flagged for an electric razor wtf- and when they looked into the travel pouch there was 10k- The tsa guard just said - where you headed I said Vegas- and he said try not to loose it all the first day!!



Carrying large sum of cash gives you great convenience and make it much easier for you to schedule your activities.
LuckyPhow
LuckyPhow
Joined: May 19, 2016
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 678
August 24th, 2016 at 8:46:44 AM permalink
777,

>>...$10,000 non-reporting limit is Federal law.

Apparently, you didn't get the memo. Here's text from page 25 of the 2016 Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual:

Cash--minimum amount must be at least $5,000, unless the person from whom the cash was seized either was, or is, being criminally prosecuted by state or federal authorities for criminal activities related to the property, in which case the amount must be at least $1,000.

OK, so the real limit is $5,000, right? Sez so right in the manual, plain as can be. But, wait! There's more, because U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) has a lotta wriggle room (because these are only "guidelines"):

These guidelines are intended to be sufficiently flexible to enable each USAO (or in administrative matters, the agent in charge of a field office) to establish and utilize local procedures that clearly define and assign local pre-seizure/restraint planning responsibilities.

Uh-huh. Right. Page 21. Local offices can make up their own rules. So, there may really be no rules.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
August 24th, 2016 at 8:56:02 AM permalink
I'm going to reiterate this.....taxes and this forfeiture crap is nothing but extortion and theft!

Vote these morons out of office that create these rules/laws!!
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
777
777
Joined: Oct 7, 2015
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 724
August 24th, 2016 at 8:56:22 AM permalink
Quote: LuckyPhow

777,

>>...$10,000 non-reporting limit is Federal law.

Apparently, you didn't get the memo. Here's text from page 25 of the 2016 Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Policy Manual:

Cash--minimum amount must be at least $5,000, unless the person from whom the cash was seized either was, or is, being criminally prosecuted by state or federal authorities for criminal activities related to the property, in which case the amount must be at least $1,000.

OK, so the real limit is $5,000, right? Sez so right in the manual, plain as can be. But, wait! There's more, because U.S. Attorney Office (USAO) has a lotta wriggle room (because these are only "guidelines"):

These guidelines are intended to be sufficiently flexible to enable each USAO (or in administrative matters, the agent in charge of a field office) to establish and utilize local procedures that clearly define and assign local pre-seizure/restraint planning responsibilities.

Uh-huh. Right. Page 21. Local offices can make up their own rules. So, there may really be no rules.



I think it is more likely that you take thing out of context. I know for certain that for banking electronic or physical transaction, amount larger than $10,000 must be reported to the fed, and I think the same rule is apply to transporting physical currency.
LuckyPhow
LuckyPhow
Joined: May 19, 2016
  • Threads: 52
  • Posts: 678
August 24th, 2016 at 9:07:46 AM permalink
Quote: LuckyPhow

Greasy,

>>...Is this really an issue traveling by car in 2016?

The original thread I mentioned is almost totally about seizures from folks driving cars, and about what to say and do when stopped. It's long, but it tells you what you need to know.

And, IMHO, the answer to your question is, Yes!



I believe there was no previous mention of the following government program, so I'll add it here:

Wall Street Journal (26-Jan-2015): U.S. Spies on Millions of Drivers -- DEA Uses License-Plate Readers to Build Database for Federal, Local Authorities

Ummm... here's the link (maybe with admin help, please): http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-spies-on-millions-of-cars-1422314779

I know everyone is busy, so here's my take on an executive summary (my emphasis):

One email written in 2010 said the primary purpose of the program was asset forfeiture—a controversial practice in which law-enforcement agencies seize cars, cash and other valuables from suspected criminals. The practice is increasingly coming under attack because of instances when law-enforcement officers take such assets without evidence of a crime.

The document said, <quote>…DEA has designed this program to assist with locating, identifying, and seizing bulk currency, guns, and other illicit contraband moving along the southwest border and throughout the United States. With that said, we want to insure we can collect and manage all the data and IT responsibilities that will come with the work to insure the program meets its goals, of which asset forfeiture is primary.<end-quote>


Is this a Great Country, or what?
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
August 24th, 2016 at 9:18:04 AM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

I'm going to reiterate this.....taxes and this forfeiture crap is nothing but extortion and theft!

Vote these morons out of office that create these rules/laws!!


Scratch "morons" and replace it with "criminals"
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
JimRockford
JimRockford
Joined: Apr 17, 2012
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 538
August 24th, 2016 at 9:45:27 AM permalink
Quote: Joeshlabotnik

So far, I haven't seen any proof that the phenomenon that everybody is getting so exercised about--cops seizing the money of innocent law -abiding citizens and their never never ever ever getting it back--actually exists. What I've seen are a few internet anecdotes, blog posts, and video podcasts. While corrupt cops may indeed be roaming the land , looking for cash like brains-starved zombies, I doubt it. It seems much more likely to be an internet meme. And a great way for hubby to explain why he's coming home from the casino flat broke: "gee, honey, I won five grand tonight, but the cops took it all!" In other words, I don't take internet tales at face value.

Then I suggest you research it further. You'll find the issue acknowledged by propaganda rags like The Washington Post and Forbes. Legislation was proposed this year to address the abuse.
"Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things." - Isaac Newton

  • Jump to: