The State Of Policing In America

[williatw]

Well as I have said I think that forfeiture of assets will be the thing that finally ends the failed social experiment of the war on drugs.

I believe that without the war on drugs they'd just find some other excuse for unconstitutional forfeiture of assets. According to http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=2203713 and other sources, there is an abundance of laws they could turn against you if they take a mind to.

Yes but the war on drugs still enjoys a large degree of public support (relatively speaking). Because until recently the most unconstitutional aspects of it, no knock warrantless searches, police brutality, prosecutorial misconduct, etc., were generally directed at the poor, especially minority poor. But forfeiture of assets is different; there is only so much money you are going to get from rousting your average inner city youth. They simply don't own much worth taking, if the driver is assets worth confiscating you have to go after those who have enough to make it worth your while. That is middle/upper middle class people. That will be what finally sours the public on the war on drugs.

[choff]

I took the time to read the guys manifesto and compare what he was talking about in the LAPD with what I've been hearing out of Britain, where the chief of the LAPD was brought over to advise the government on policing. In Britain, the complaint I've been hearing is that the police are being put on training courses where NLP is being used, to condition them to behave in much the same manner as the LAPD. This brings to fore the possibility that police in LA aren't behaving badly because they started out that way, but because they've been brainwashed without knowing it. No accident, very deliberate policy to foster unrest, break down society.

[williatw]

Actually if entitlements were ended for new entrants and the government sold land every year to pay for those already enrolled no cuts would be required.

Come now do you really think young people would be willing to be taxed paying into SS/Medicare to support the elderly with the understanding that they would not even be covered/eligible when the time comes? Fat chance that would fly. If you really think maintaining our global bases is stopping WWIII, than a few million old people in the US should be willing to sacrifice their benefits to save many more that would surely be killed in said world war. We both know what the answer to that would likely be, no sale, they would simply refuse to accept that necessity.

[MSimon]

Well as I have said I think that forfeiture of assets will be the thing that finally ends the failed social experiment of the war on drugs.

I believe that without the war on drugs they'd just find some other excuse for unconstitutional forfeiture of assets. According to http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=2203713 and other sources, there is an abundance of laws they could turn against you if they take a mind to.

Yes but the war on drugs still enjoys a large degree of public support (relatively speaking). Because until recently the most unconstitutional aspects of it, no knock warrantless searches, police brutality, prosecutorial misconduct, etc., were generally directed at the poor, especially minority poor. But forfeiture of assets is different; there is only so much money you are going to get from rousting your average inner city youth. They simply don't own much worth taking, if the driver is assets worth confiscating you have to go after those who have enough to make it worth your while. That is middle/upper middle class people. That will be what finally sours the public on the war on drugs.

That is exactly what a the DEA told this Federal Marshall http://youtu.be/72Lf9ZQK8t0 - don't go after upscale white people. It will end it.

[MSimon]

Actually if entitlements were ended for new entrants and the government sold land every year to pay for those already enrolled no cuts would be required.

Come now do you really think young people would be willing to be taxed paying into SS/Medicare to support the elderly with the understanding that they would not even be covered/eligible when the time comes? Fat chance that would fly. If you really think maintaining our global bases is stopping WWIII, than a few million old people in the US should be willing to sacrifice their benefits to save many more that would surely be killed in said world war. We both know what the answer to that would likely be, no sale, they would simply refuse to accept that necessity.

Stop the tax for young people by paying for those remaining in the program by selling Government land.

[hanelyp]

Stop the tax for young people by paying for those remaining in the program by selling Government land.

As a plan for unwinding an entitlement, that has merit. I don't have figures handy for how much money would be needed, or how much the land would have to be priced to cover it.

[ladajo]

It is a finite option to sell federal land.
And who is going to buy it?
The majority of federal land is undeveloped areas.
The land in developed areas is in active use. Even with BRAC, those former DOD facilities have been turned over to state/local/private.

[williatw]

Actually if entitlements were ended for new entrants and the government sold land every year to pay for those already enrolled no cuts would be required.

Come now do you really think young people would be willing to be taxed paying into SS/Medicare to support the elderly with the understanding that they would not even be covered/eligible when the time comes? Fat chance that would fly. If you really think maintaining our global bases is stopping WWIII, than a few million old people in the US should be willing to sacrifice their benefits to save many more that would surely be killed in said world war. We both know what the answer to that would likely be, no sale, they would simply refuse to accept that necessity.

Stop the tax for young people by paying for those remaining in the program by selling Government land.

Yeah that would work...sell the land to people/corporations whatever. Of course at some point in the future the gov could use imminent domain to take the land back at whatever price they see fit (less than what the originally sold it for of course).

[MSimon]

It is a finite option to sell federal land.
And who is going to buy it?
The majority of federal land is undeveloped areas.
The land in developed areas is in active use. Even with BRAC, those former DOD facilities have been turned over to state/local/private.

And undeveloped lad is worthless? And mineral rights have no value?

[ladajo]

It is a finite option to sell federal land.
And who is going to buy it?
The majority of federal land is undeveloped areas.
The land in developed areas is in active use. Even with BRAC, those former DOD facilities have been turned over to state/local/private.

And undeveloped lad is worthless? And mineral rights have no value?

Selling land and selling mineral rights are two different things.

Undeveloped land with limted to no access in existance is not worth much.

Mineral rights are complicated. It is not like buying a loaf of bread. Especially when talking mineral rights on federal land. You need to educate yourself on this a little. Have fun.