Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Rand Paul: ‘I Think Civil Asset Forfeiture Is a Terrible Idea Until You’ve Convicted Someone

  1. #1

    Rand Paul: ‘I Think Civil Asset Forfeiture Is a Terrible Idea Until You’ve Convicted Someone

    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...ea-until-youve

    Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) told C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers” on Sunday that he thinks civil asset forfeiture – where police can seize, then keep or sell any property they suspect is involved in a crime regardless of whether or not the owner is arrested or even convicted - “is a terrible idea until you’ve convicted someone.”

    “There was a discussion the other day in the White House about civil asset forfeiture. I think civil asset forfeiture is a terrible idea until you’ve convicted someone, and I’d like to have that discussion with the president,” Paul said.

    Paul was asked how concerned he was that the Trump administration could expand surveillance powers given that Paul voted against the confirmation of Mike Pompeo to head the CIA, but voted for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to lead the Justice Department.

    “How concerned are you that the Sessions Justice Department, the Pompeo CIA, the potential ODNI administration of Dan Coats are going to go back more towards the direction that you’ve been opposed for many years?” a reporter asked.

    Paul said he was “very concerned, and while I do have some agreements with President Trump on less regulation, less taxes, replacing Obamacare, on surveillance we may not be – or on privacy – on the same wavelength. We’ll have to see.”

    Paul said addressing the issue of civil asset forfeiture is important, because it unfairly targets poor people.

    “I’ve had that discussion with Senator Sessions,” he said, referring to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who was sworn in last week, “and I think some of the things we’ve done particularly to poor people—poor people in our country deal in cash more than wealthier people, and more than people who have their life better planned out who might deal with money in a different way.

    “They have cash, and they walk around—doesn’t make them automatically guilty of a crime because they deal in cash, and so I think in order to take someone’s money from them, the government ought to prove that it was ill gotten,” Paul said, adding that the other side of that argument is “if someone’s caught with 50 kilos of some kind of drug and then there’s $50,000 in cash sitting there that somehow the people that are caught are going to get it back. That never happens.

    “What we’re really, really talking about is people driving down the road, walking down the street…they just have their possessions taken from them without any kind of conviction,” he said.

    “There’s a real danger, and there have been instances of up and down the country of little towns on the side of highways just pulling over everybody and just taking their money, almost like some sort of Robin Hood kind of scheme, so I do worry about that, and I will continue to stand up for what I feel is right no matter no matter whether it’s a Republican or Democrat in office,” Paul said.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Same position as on the drones, it looks like.
    Meaning he's totally okay with it if you make these crooked, evil bureaucrats fill out a couple of pieces of paper before they do it.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Same position as on the drones, it looks like.
    Meaning he's totally okay with it if you make these crooked, evil bureaucrats fill out a couple of pieces of paper before they do it.
    lol, one step at a time.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    lol, one step at a time.
    See that is the entire problem that sank the Liberty Movement. You do not make political gains by taking one step at a time! You make political gains by pushing for 300% of what it is that you hope to achieve in the short-term. You would think that after failing so many times we would have figured out this is politics 101.
    When you fight for one small thing then that one thing becomes the only thing that you have to give up in order to get anything done politically. It's why both parties have major platforms that they run on and never actually make any movement on. Republicans will never banned abortion. Democrats will never stop black people getting strangled on the sidewalk.
    If Republicans were fighting for unwed pregnant women to be executed, and Democrats were fighting for total abolition of any law enforcement at all, then they would get what they want.
    Asking for bureaucratic measures is straight up loser talk.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Same position as on the drones, it looks like.
    Meaning he's totally okay with it if you make these crooked, evil bureaucrats fill out a couple of pieces of paper before they do it.
    Seemed to me he said asset forfeiture should only happen if a conviction occurs.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Seemed to me he said asset forfeiture should only happen if a conviction occurs.
    Why are you able to read and comprehend and fisharmor is not?
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll

  8. #7
    Weak libertarian. We need more hardcore Ron Pauls.
    Sanity Check Radio Show
    http://www.SanityCheckRadioShow.com

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    See that is the entire problem that sank the Liberty Movement. You do not make political gains by taking one step at a time! You make political gains by pushing for 300% of what it is that you hope to achieve in the short-term. You would think that after failing so many times we would have figured out this is politics 101.
    When you fight for one small thing then that one thing becomes the only thing that you have to give up in order to get anything done politically. It's why both parties have major platforms that they run on and never actually make any movement on. Republicans will never banned abortion. Democrats will never stop black people getting strangled on the sidewalk.
    If Republicans were fighting for unwed pregnant women to be executed, and Democrats were fighting for total abolition of any law enforcement at all, then they would get what they want.
    Asking for bureaucratic measures is straight up loser talk.
    Audit the FED wouldn't be in the position it is today (cleared majority of house and nearly clearing the senate and a POTUS willing to potentially sign vs absolutely not.) without incremental progress.

    Only SJW millennials are self-entitled enough to think that they'll get everything they want if they only demand it.


    Thomas Massie recently introduced legislation to abolish the Dept. of Education, how far will that realistically get?
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    How would that look if the citizens had a right to civil asset forfeiture for what the House and Senate have stolen from them? I would like to liquidate most of them because they have gotten rich off of my hard work and yours. Rand and a few others had legitimate jobs before they came to Washington, but most didn't.
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    See that is the entire problem that sank the Liberty Movement. You do not make political gains by taking one step at a time! You make political gains by pushing for 300% of what it is that you hope to achieve in the short-term. You would think that after failing so many times we would have figured out this is politics 101.
    When you fight for one small thing then that one thing becomes the only thing that you have to give up in order to get anything done politically. It's why both parties have major platforms that they run on and never actually make any movement on. Republicans will never banned abortion. Democrats will never stop black people getting strangled on the sidewalk.
    If Republicans were fighting for unwed pregnant women to be executed, and Democrats were fighting for total abolition of any law enforcement at all, then they would get what they want.
    Asking for bureaucratic measures is straight up loser talk.
    One step at a time worked for the Republicans (after Bush many thought the Republican party was done, now they are at their strongest point in maybe a century), that method does require focus and patience. The problem with libertarians is that they love to attack their own instead of supporting them. That is why there is never any progress.


    Simple question libertarians should ask themselves. Would this be better than or improve what we have today? If the answer is yes then support it, if the answer is no then don't.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeman View Post
    One step at a time worked for the Republicans (after Bush many thought the Republican party was done, now they are at their strongest point in maybe a century), that method does require focus and patience. The problem with libertarians is that they love to attack their own instead of supporting them. That is why there is never any progress.


    Simple question libertarians should ask themselves. Would this be better than or improve what we have today? If the answer is yes then support it, if the answer is no then don't.
    This doesn't work with the numbers libertarians have. Now check Al Sharpton.

  14. #12
    Then why did he vote for Sessions?
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  15. #13
    $#@!ing mind boggling that we're even having this conversation, the notion that government can just take your $#@! because it (your $#@! not you) might be guilty or something.

    Land of the free my ass.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    Same position as on the drones, it looks like.
    Meaning he's totally okay with it if you make these crooked, evil bureaucrats fill out a couple of pieces of paper before they do it.
    Good point. Bernie Madoff earned that money. Why should the government be able to take the fruits of his labor through civil asset forfeiture after he is convicted? He stole it fair and square. Rand is such a big gubmint slaver. Thieves Lives Matter.

    This is the kind of terrible incrementalism that has created this slave state. First you take the money that criminals earn committing a crime next thing you know Rand will start advocating that police take children away from parents who molest them.
    Last edited by Krugminator2; 02-13-2017 at 07:47 PM.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by eleganz View Post
    Why are you able to read and comprehend and fisharmor is not?
    I repeated exactly what he said. They can take assets if they file the paperwork. You can call a conviction something special if you want, but it reduces to filing the paperwork.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  18. #16
    Rand be like: lets ban civil asset forfeiture

    Some libertarians be like: Screw you sellout bastard NeoCon Whore! why aren't you trying to ban criminal asset forfeiture you fart swallower?

    Other libertarians be like: um we could actually ban civil asset forfeiture and 90% of Americans are on our side so why not own this issue instead of making it into a losing one???
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe






  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeman View Post
    One step at a time worked for the Republicans (after Bush many thought the Republican party was done, now they are at their strongest point in maybe a century), that method does require focus and patience. The problem with libertarians is that they love to attack their own instead of supporting them. That is why there is never any progress.


    Simple question libertarians should ask themselves. Would this be better than or improve what we have today? If the answer is yes then support it, if the answer is no then don't.
    The reason he liberty movement is dead and buried is because of you who went balls-on-chin into the political machine and ignored the reality around you.

    We have a man in power who is threatening to destroy the careers of state officials who disagree with him, making regular claims that the police state isn't powerful enough, is totally ok with killing 8 year olds, and is ramping the drug war up farther than it has been since the 80s.

    But that's all ok because the Republican party is healthy? Are you people $#@!ing insane?
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Rand be like: lets ban civil asset forfeiture

    Some libertarians be like: Screw you sellout bastard NeoCon Whore! why aren't you trying to ban criminal asset forfeiture you fart swallower?

    Other libertarians be like: um we could actually ban civil asset forfeiture and 90% of Americans are on our side so why not own this issue instead of making it into a losing one???
    Someone ban this guy, he's making too much sense.
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist View Post
    Land of the free my ass.
    Land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy!
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  23. #20
    In before the Trumpsters call Rand a cuck for being anti-cop.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeman View Post
    One step at a time worked for the Republicans (after Bush many thought the Republican party was done, now they are at their strongest point in maybe a century), that method does require focus and patience. The problem with libertarians is that they love to attack their own instead of supporting them. That is why there is never any progress.


    Simple question libertarians should ask themselves. Would this be better than or improve what we have today? If the answer is yes then support it, if the answer is no then don't.
    The problem with libertarians as it pertains to politics is, even including the 'socially liberal, fiscally conservative' libertarians, we're outnumbered 100 to 1.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    The reason he liberty movement is dead and buried is because of you who went balls-on-chin into the political machine and ignored the reality around you.

    We have a man in power who is threatening to destroy the careers of state officials who disagree with him, making regular claims that the police state isn't powerful enough, is totally ok with killing 8 year olds, and is ramping the drug war up farther than it has been since the 80s.

    But that's all ok because the Republican party is healthy? Are you people $#@!ing insane?
    If anyone is insane it appears to be you. Who knew something so blase could trigger a person like this.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess View Post
    The problem with libertarians as it pertains to politics is, even including the 'socially liberal, fiscally conservative' libertarians, we're outnumbered 100 to 1.
    Maybe but it doesn't help that to be a libertarian you have to go through a purity test and anything not in lockstep with libertarian ideologue is perceived as traitorous. My point is there are a lot of people who consider themselves to be libertarian or libertarian leaning, now they may be viewed as "faux" libertarians but it's better than nothing. Beggars can't be choosers. If a person is truly socially liberal but not fiscally conservative (or vice versa) and still considers themselves a libertarian why not embrace that? I admit I'm not perfect when it comes to this (opposition to Gary Johnson)

    Maybe I'm wrong but it's better than doing the same thing over and over.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This doesn't work with the numbers libertarians have. Now check Al Sharpton.
    It won't work if we continue to put libertarians through a purity test. If it isn't perfect then it's awful mentality is so absurd to me. If libertarians were more willing to embrace people and ideas that were libertarian leaning, as a whole it would improve things. The mistake a lot of people (including Rand) made was assuming the liberty movement = libertarians or liberty minded people. That wasn't the case but it can show how powerful a movement can be if we include non-libertarians to push libertarian ideas.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25



Similar Threads

  1. Video: Rand Paul - Civil Asset Forfeiture
    By mello in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-18-2015, 11:02 AM
  2. Sen. Mike Lee on Civil Asset Forfeiture
    By Brian4Liberty in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-27-2015, 06:34 AM
  3. Rand Paul to Barack Obama: Do you support civil asset forfeiture?
    By Brian4Liberty in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-21-2015, 03:10 PM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-29-2015, 05:56 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-16-2015, 08:58 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •