• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting Sued

Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

radcen said:
New Mexico Passed a Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, and Now It’s Getting Sued

New Mexico Passed a Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, and Now It?s Getting Sued - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Thread title shortened to fit.
Click to expand...

The government loves to steal. They won't go down without a fight, unfortunately it seems that everything is stacked against the Citizen. This is a government no longer beholden to the People.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Ikari said:
The government loves to steal. They won't go down without a fight, unfortunately it seems that everything is stacked against the Citizen. This is a government no longer beholden to the People.
Click to expand...

When has it ever been?
Prior to the 1960's was our governement beholden to the rights of women,blacks,Hispanics,Native Americans,etc.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Verthaine said:
When has it ever been?
Prior to the 1960's was our governement beholden to the rights of women,blacks,Hispanics,Native Americans,etc.
Click to expand...

Or even further back when it was only beholden to land owners.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

I hope Albuquerque gets hit hard. And, all the poor pitiful victims whining have my sympathy. Civil seizure is wrong and the state government, which is a part of the government, took action to stop it and Albuquerque, another government entity, ignored them. But, that didn't stem the whining.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Patrickt said:
I hope Albuquerque gets hit hard. And, all the poor pitiful victims whining have my sympathy. Civil seizure is wrong and the state government, which is a part of the government, took action to stop it and Albuquerque, another government entity, ignored them. But, that didn't stem the whining.
Click to expand...

When does informed objection become whining?
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Thoreau72 said:
When does informed objection become whining?
Click to expand...

"When has it ever been?
Prior to the 1960's was our governement beholden to the rights of women,blacks,Hispanics,Native Americans,etc."
I think the woman and et cetera did fine. Blacks got screwed. Hispanics were a mixed bag and there was a world of difference between Indians who chose the reservation and a check versus working in the world.

"Or even further back when it was only beholden to land owners."
Oh, the horror. How dare the people who paid the taxes have any say at all. It should have been more like today.

Not only was it pointless whining but totally off topic. The state government, which is still government I think, did the right thing and Albuquerque, which is also a government entity, isn't doing the right thing.

So, the whiners have to carp on the horrors of both the past and the government most of them want more of.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

you can't just leave the car on the side of the road.
It was legally towed he was under arrest for dui.

Just like they can impound your car on a suspended license or without insurance.
This isn't like other cases where they assume something and just seize the car without trial.

He was proven to be drunk driving. Although he should be fined for it not the mother.
All she should have to do is pay the lot fee and they should release the car.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

ludin said:
you can't just leave the car on the side of the road.
It was legally towed he was under arrest for dui.

Just like they can impound your car on a suspended license or without insurance.
This isn't like other cases where they assume something and just seize the car without trial.

He was proven to be drunk driving. Although he should be fined for it not the mother.
All she should have to do is pay the lot fee and they should release the car.
Click to expand...
1) Impounding a vehicle and seizing a vehicle are two different things. If it were just impounding there would be no story.

2) The original linked article only says he was, "...pulled over and arrested for drunk driving." It says nothing about conviction or guilt or that it was proven or charges even being filed.

3) Keep in mind that, under this program, one only needs to be suspected of having committed a crime. No conviction, or even charges, necessary, to take a person's vehicle.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Albuquerque resident Arlene Harjo, 56, is paying off a loan for a car she doesn't have, because the city seized it for a crime it readily admits she didn't commit, under an asset forfeiture program that is supposed to be banned.

After her son was pulled over for drunk driving, Harjo became one of roughly a thousand people every year who have their car seized by the city of Albuquerque in a process heavily weighted against the property owner. But unlike the vast majority of those cases, she's not rolling over. A new lawsuit filed Wednesday in state court by Harjo and the Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm, argues the city's lucrative vehicle seizure program stands in direct contradiction of recently passed state laws and "is driven by a pernicious—and unconstitutional—profit incentive" that deprived Harjo of her 14th Amendment due process rights

:2razz:
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

radcen said:
New Mexico Passed a Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, and Now It’s Getting Sued

New Mexico Passed a Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, and Now It?s Getting Sued - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Thread title shortened to fit.
Click to expand...

Terrible law to begin with. Forfeiture on convicted drug charges, I have no problem with, take it all..... this however is wrong.

Ikari said:
The government loves to steal. They won't go down without a fight, unfortunately it seems that everything is stacked against the Citizen. This is a government no longer beholden to the People.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Verthaine said:
When has it ever been?
Prior to the 1960's was our governement beholden to the rights of women,blacks,Hispanics,Native Americans,etc.
Click to expand...

Still aren't, after years of Democrat promises and campaign platforms, to the contrary. Hillary is no different and nothing will happen if she is elected.

radcen said:
1) Impounding a vehicle and seizing a vehicle are two different things. If it were just impounding there would be no story.

2) The original linked article only says he was, "...pulled over and arrested for drunk driving." It says nothing about conviction or guilt or that it was proven or charges even being filed.

3) Keep in mind that, under this program, one only needs to be suspected of having committed a crime. No conviction, or even charges, necessary, to take a person's vehicle.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Master PO said:
Albuquerque resident Arlene Harjo, 56, is paying off a loan for a car she doesn't have, because the city seized it for a crime it readily admits she didn't commit, under an asset forfeiture program that is supposed to be banned.

After her son was pulled over for drunk driving, Harjo became one of roughly a thousand people every year who have their car seized by the city of Albuquerque in a process heavily weighted against the property owner. But unlike the vast majority of those cases, she's not rolling over. A new lawsuit filed Wednesday in state court by Harjo and the Institute for Justice, a libertarian-leaning public interest law firm, argues the city's lucrative vehicle seizure program stands in direct contradiction of recently passed state laws and "is driven by a pernicious—and unconstitutional—profit incentive" that deprived Harjo of her 14th Amendment due process rights

:2razz:
Click to expand...

More power to her...I hope she wins big!
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

Civil seizure after due process = good
Civil seizure without due process = government theft. Worse than organized crime.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

radcen said:
1) Impounding a vehicle and seizing a vehicle are two different things. If it were just impounding there would be no story.

2) The original linked article only says he was, "...pulled over and arrested for drunk driving." It says nothing about conviction or guilt or that it was proven or charges even being filed.

3) Keep in mind that, under this program, one only needs to be suspected of having committed a crime. No conviction, or even charges, necessary, to take a person's vehicle.
Click to expand...

Most states will impound a car if you are caught driving without a licenses or suspended license.
If you are driving without insurance or car registration.

A field test of DUI is enough of a test to put someone under arrest.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

ludin said:
Most states will impound a car if you are caught driving without a licenses or suspended license.
If you are driving without insurance or car registration.

A field test of DUI is enough of a test to put someone under arrest.
Click to expand...
This particular thread is about a specific story, not most states. And, as noted earlier, impound and seizure are not the same things.

Under arrest does not necessarily lead to charges, and under arrest by itself does not equal conviction.
 
Re: NM Passed Law Ending Civil Forfeiture. Albuquerque Ignored It, Now It’s Getting S

radcen said:
This particular thread is about a specific story, not most states. And, as noted earlier, impound and seizure are not the same things.

Under arrest does not necessarily lead to charges, and under arrest by itself does not equal conviction.
Click to expand...

Sorry but they can't just leave the car on the side of the road it then becomes a highway hazard.
they will more than likely impound the car. you have to pay the fee and fine and then you can get the car back.

It doesn't have to lead to charges when we are talking about DUI, or driving on a suspended license.

The only thing I can see that the city can't do is boot her car for a year and the 4k fine is a bit over the top.
they can however impound the car which is what they did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom