Jusme wrote:What I find most troubling, in the article, is that police department's, claim that they lost a large amount of funding, under the more restrictive regulations. The idea that a department is funded, due to crime, sends the wrong message. First, it encourages, over zealous seizures, and second, it would also open the door for selective enforcement, in that rather than try to prevent crime in the first place, it would allow small time dealers to get bigger, to acquire a larger haul.
Asset forfeiture was never designed, nor should it be used, as a budgeting tool. It should only be used, to provide things, not budgeted. And only after due process, has been met, to allow for the forfeiture in the first place. JMHO