
Police use new device to seize money in bank accounts or on prepaid cards - jonstokes
http://www.news9.com/story/32168555/ohp-uses-new-device-to-seize-money-used-during-the-commission-of-a-crime
======
joveian
Radley Balko talks about this article and has links to more details of past
asset forfeiture abuses in Oklahoma:

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
watch/wp/2016/06/08/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
watch/wp/2016/06/08/new-frontiers-in-asset-forfeiture/)

------
downandout
Here's a fun little video from the manufacturer extolling the virtues and
showing a demo of their device:
[https://youtu.be/XYbgnCi7NYI](https://youtu.be/XYbgnCi7NYI)

These are some truly evil people. Apparently they can only target prepaid
cards with this thing, which unsurprisingly will disproportionately affect
people with lower incomes (the "unbanked"). According to the manufacturer's
FAQ [1]:

 _Intel™ and ERAD-Recovery™ will only retrieve balances from open loop prepaid
debit cards. Debit cards attached to a valid checking account or valid credit
cards cannot be processed using the ERAD-Intel™ or ERAD-Recovery™ system._

Law enforcement already depends heavily upon lower income neighborhoods to
justify their existence, and upon criminal convictions of poor people that
can't defend themselves to keep up demand for prison and jail guards. Now they
want to take the money of those they can't arrest, knowing that their targets
cannot afford to hire lawyers to get it back.

[1] [https://www.erad-group.com/faqs](https://www.erad-group.com/faqs)

~~~
cornchips
Yes, evil. As is Sergeant Rob Hain (of Chicago) who uploaded this...

"Sheriff's Deputy Ron Hain improperly detained Marsh after issuing him a
warning and continued questioning him when he should have been free to leave,
Barsanti ruled. The questioning led to Marsh's admission he was carrying a
gun, which prompted further searches of his truck, phones, GPS and eventually
the storage lockers."

"The discovery was made by exploiting the defendant's Fourth Amendment
rights," Barsanti said. "He was illegally detained in a second seizure without
cause." [1]

"Seized over 4,000 lbs of cannabis, over 50 kilograms of cocaine, over 50
kilograms of heroin, and over $1,000,000 of drug-related currency." [2]

1
[https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160406/news/160409204/](https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160406/news/160409204/)

2 [https://archive.is/Bf1ss](https://archive.is/Bf1ss)

~~~
downandout
From [1].... _“All of our home towns are sitting on a tax-liberating gold
mine,” Deputy Ron Hain of Kane County, Ill., wrote in a self-published book
under a pseudonym. Hain is a marketing specialist for Desert Snow, a leading
interdiction training firm based in Guthrie, Okla., whose founders also
created Black Asphalt._

Desert Snow created civil forfeiture training seminars for law enforcement.
Black Asphalt is a system "that enabled police nationwide to share detailed
reports about American motorists — criminals and the innocent alike —
including their Social Security numbers, addresses and identifying tattoos, as
well as hunches about which drivers to stop."

Now, he's stealing debit cards. This guy is quite the civil forfeiture
innovator.

[1]
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-
and-seize/)

~~~
cornchips
Owning a business related and supposedly selling to law enforcement while
being employed by the force... Conflict of interest, anyone?

~~~
slavik81
That's probably only a conflict on interest if they are involved in making
purchasing decisions. Your mileage may vary. Always ask your ethics
councillor.

------
linkregister
From the article:

    
    
        State Sen. Kyle Loveless, R-Oklahoma City, said that
        removes due process and the belief that a suspect is
        presumed innocent until proven guilty. He said we've
        already seen cases in Oklahoma where police are abusing
        the system. 
    
        "We've seen single mom's stuff be taken, a cancer
        survivor his drugs taken, we saw a Christian band being
        taken. We've seen innocent people's stuff being taken.
        We've seen where the money goes and how it's been
        misspent," Loveless said.
    

If State Sen. Loveless's statement is accurate, it appears that these victims
were unable to get the charges reversed by their banks' fraud departments.

So what would this device look like? Is it performing ACH or wire transfer
transactions? Or is this just sending card information to the company, which
then automates the state government's garnishment process?

I'll be interested to get the full story when details are available.

I'm glad there's some pushback from the state legislature!

~~~
tn13
> If State Sen. Loveless's statement is accurate

As someone who is closely following the topic I would say he is pretty
accurate.

Most of these laws are passed claiming it is meant to target hardened
criminals. Good people like us think it is okay to take away any rights of
people who we consider as bad. Given the choice cops will not knock down the
door of Drug dealer known to have automatic rifles at his home but some poor
old cancer patient who is unlikely to resist or cry.

These problems are not a creation of police. These are created by good people
like us who do not empathize with criminals, minorities and other groups which
by default consider "less human".

~~~
honua
> These problems are not a creation of police. These are created by good
> people like us who do not empathize with criminals, minorities and other
> groups which by default consider "less human".

I agree that the problem is considering others as "less human" but I wouldn't
exclude the police from that!

~~~
tn13
I understand your sentiment. But I think as a society we have allowed the
legal system to evolve in a way that only Bullies will become and thrive as
cops and narcissist jerks will become public prosecutors. They are problem but
they are more of a side-effect of we not standing up for other people's
liberty.

~~~
meric
Some of us think there are good people, who have rights, and bad people, who
deserve to have rights taken from them.

Some of us think there are people with power we need to impress and then there
are people without power we can take from them whatever we want.

Some of us think we are all human beings and everyone deserves to be a part of
society, to be seen as human beings with human wants, needs and human
emotions, even when they do things that harm other people. And whether they
even do that, is not for us to judge.

The first group needed people who were willing to take things from the bad
guys, and picked the second group as police and prosecutors.

That's how we're in this situation today.

Your child ask you if they can go to your donald-trump-loving-women-should-
stay-in-kitchen neighbour's house to play with friends. Do you:

1\. Change your child's school so they don't mix with the 'wrong sort'. You're
afraid what your social circle think if your children mix with children of
people like that.

2\. Your neighbours are racists and sexists. Petition their kids to be kicked
out from your kids' school. They don't deserve an education.

3\. Let your child go play with them, then if your child has a positive
experience, let him go again next time. If not, protect the child from the
consequences of not going next time.

------
rm_-rf_slash
Symptom of a bigger problem: nobody in the criminal justice system is punished
for making the wrong move. There is no law enforcement downside to civil asset
forfeiture. Officer-involved shootings are discouraged from prosecution or
otherwise involve highly-paid "expert" witnesses saying the officer had no
other choice - at taxpayer expense.

Prosecutors are valued by the number of wins, not by how many innocent people
are spared the gauntlet of the American justice system.

Prisons (especially private prisons) are rewarded for high recidivism rates,
instead of being punished for wasting taxpayer money on an expensive and
brutal daycare.

If the state does badly enough it can get sued. So the taxpayers foot the bill
while the offenders are free to do as they do.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: prevent this kind of garbage from
happing without consequence by mandating docked wages/pension benefits to pay
for all or part of lawsuit damages. Change the incentives and people will
change themselves.

~~~
tajen
Bonus question: In countries that are still exempt from highway police robbery
such as in Europe, what can we do to avoid gliding towards it? Isn't HPR a
natural evolution of the increased number of police agents after massive
terrorist attacks, like the two we've just had in France?

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
Simple: pay for things you need.

Over the last few decades the American people have been conned into this idea
that government is fundamentally too big and needs to be shrunk because of
reasons. People save a few measly percentage points on taxes that help pay for
the axle damage on their car after being driven over roads that are no longer
repaired.

Municipalities had to find ways to recoup costs from slashed state and federal
budgets, which is why there is such a big problem in poor, mostly black
American cities, as people are pulled over and fined up the ass for every
possible infraction just so the city can afford itself.

This kind of crap has nothing to do with terrorism and everything to do with
fiscal irresponsibility.

~~~
refurb
_Municipalities had to find ways to recoup costs from slashed state and
federal budgets_

When was the last time you saw _any_ gov't budget go down? I'd say never.

The gov't has more than enough money. The problem is where and how they spend
it.

~~~
nikdaheratik
Other than _every month_ in my home state of Kansas. Of course, that is
related to much larger issues, but the same thing could be said for a number
of other states in the midwest to a lesser degree. And those that aren't going
down, are just treading water by pushing the costs down to the local
governments.

------
wccrawford
This reads like The Onion. I can't believe they're serious.

>"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past," Vincent
said about any money seized.

... Legit reason? How am I supposed to prove where every cent came from? What
happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

~~~
stackus
You're never charged with a crime, the object is and it is not given
representation. So there's no "innocent until proven guilty" for inanimate
objects.

Despicable, and akin to highway robbery in my opinion.

~~~
1_2__3
This is flatly incorrect. This is a _civil_ proceeding, neither you nor your
property are charged with a crime. Instead, a civil (not criminal) forfeiture
proceeding is initiated against your property.

I'm not just being pedantic, this is part of why it's so incredibly fucked.
They have, no exaggeration, taken a portion of the criminal legal system with
all the constraints and due process requirements there, excised it with a
legislative scalpel and grafted it back on to the civil system.

I honestly to this day don't understand why government is allowed any access
at all to the civil system as a plaintiff, at least not beyond the local
level.

Oh wait, yes I do understand: It's specifically to fuck the people over.

~~~
mahyarm
Sue a contractor for not upholding your contract with the federal / state
government? Like road building or whatever else.

~~~
1_2__3
I have to imagine there's a giant pile of (criminal) laws they could use to
prosecute someone who's trying to defraud the government. But your point is
still well-taken, and it's kind of academic anyway - it's an incredibly
valuable (and lucrative) tool for the government, of course they're not going
to give it up.

------
DickingAround
And the scanner maker gets a 7% cut. What could go wrong: "the state is paying
ERAD Group Inc., $5,000 for the software and scanners, then 7.7 percent of all
the cash the highway patrol seizes"

~~~
redditplebs
Time to lookup ERAD Inc. online. Fun times ahead!

~~~
toomuchtodo
I'm already spinning up a comprehensive FOIA request with MuckRock.com. Feel
free to reply to my comment if anyone would like to collaborate.

~~~
chiph
Can you include something like this?

"What states does ERAD currently have contracts with? With what states does
ERAD anticipate contracts to be signed in the next 180 days, and for all of
these states, what percentages will ERAD be earning on funds seized?"

~~~
toomuchtodo
I'd need to FOIA every police department in order to do this :/ Not scalable.
I _can_ create a template that can be used whenever its discovered which
police departments are using their services.

I'm in touch with the news station that has the contract, so I should be able
to get it without an additional FOIA request. Once I have that, I'll recurse
further if necessary.

------
molecule
_> Here's how it works. If a trooper suspects you may have money tied to some
type of crime, the highway patrol can scan any cards you have and seize the
money._

Given the low-threshold for seizure and how we've seen civil-asset forfeiture
exercised by law enforcement, that's terrifying.

~~~
jobu
Agreed:

 _" We've seen single mom's stuff be taken, a cancer survivor his drugs taken,
we saw a Christian band being taken. We've seen innocent people's stuff being
taken. We've seen where the money goes and how it's been misspent," Loveless
said._

It boggles the mind that this doesn't violate due process.

~~~
viggity
The despicable logic they use is that they're not charging the person with a
crime (because people have due process rights), they're charging an inanimate
object, the money, the car, etc. Property doesn't have due process rights,
apparently.

Seriously. If you look at the court cases for asset forfeitures, it is titled
"The State of Oklahoma vs $1,534.32 in cash" or "Iowa vs 2014 Mercedes".

~~~
visarga
> Property doesn't have due process rights,

Apparently, property doesn't really belong to us.

~~~
pigpaws
try not paying your property tax and see what happens. Deeds mean nothing.
Receipts mean nothing. Registration means nothing. The State owns everything.

------
imroot
This is a copy of the contract that the OHP with ERAD Group:

[http://oklahomawatch.wpengine.netdna-
cdn.com/files/2016/06/E...](http://oklahomawatch.wpengine.netdna-
cdn.com/files/2016/06/ERADContractBid.pdf)

Highlights:

* ERAD is taking 7.7% of all funds seized.

* Anywhere between 9.95 and 14.95 per each virtual terminal used to scan for the funds.

* $1000-ish per physical terminal used.

~~~
zrail
Searching for "debit" brings up this:

> In addition to presenting the value associated with a card, the terminal
> will read other card types such as credit and debit cards. While no value
> can be provided, the terminal will display a “card not supported” message to
> alert the trooper that this is not a prepaid card. The trooper can then
> compare the four digits displayed on the terminal with the last four digits
> shown on the face of the card to determine if the card has been cloned. If
> the last four digits on the face of the card do not match the four digits
> displayed on the terminal, the trooper should note the discrepancy and
> pursue further action in the investigation.

I'm not really sure why they compare the last 4 digits to detect a clone, that
seems wrong to me. But in any case, that strongly implies that they can't
seize from debit cards linked to bank accounts. They can only seize from
prepaid cards.

~~~
FireBeyond
"I'm not really sure why they compare the last 4 digits to detect a clone,
that seems wrong to me."

It catches lazy counterfeiting. Stamp a whole bunch of cards with the same
number and info, while the magstripe is what gets read and is the real account
you're stealing from, the theory being that no-one really cares about the
number printed on the card.

Some retailers do this too, ask or enter the last four of the card to make
sure the imprint matches the magstripe, as if they don't it's most likely a
cloned card.

~~~
EvanAnderson
I particularly enjoy when a cashier asks me to read the last 4 digits of the
card, rather than following the instructions on the terminal (which say
something like "Give card to cashier...").

~~~
rconti
Oh. I had no idea why they did this. That makes sense. I guess I just figured
it was so easy to PROPERLY clone and stamp a card, that it didn't cross my
mind..

------
50CNT
That is physically revolting.

First you have civil-asset forfeiture that let's police seize money from you
when you are carrying large amounts of cash (with a generous false positive
rate potentially disastrous to victims).

Now to get around that, you could try handling everything by card or bank
transaction (unless you're one of the unfortunate few without access to a bank
account due to low credit rating or other legitimate reasons). And now they
can seize that too?

That's not ripe for abuse, that's designed for abuse.

As a non-American, what's wrong with your country?

~~~
facetube
A whole lot is wrong. I was born here and love the country, but increasingly
fear for my safety and well-being: our employer pays nearly $20,000 per year
for NHS-equivalent health insurance (two adults, no children), basic
prescriptions cause multi-month fights due to claim denials on drugs my doctor
instructed me to take, patent trolling is endemic and a real threat to small
bootstrapped companies, a pathological liar is one step away from the White
House and lending legitimacy to anti-first-amendment and white supremacist
groups, literal highway robbery is real, and as best as I can tell money has
come to be held above life itself.

I'm profoundly disillusioned, and not sure where to go from here.

~~~
tajen
You forgot: the TSA, the "warning shots in the chest" (it's a meme), the 6% of
black people currently in prison, the 1% of all population currently in
prison, the freedom you export (another meme - yes I'm talking about the
drone-based assinations outsourced to private companies), and the NSA patently
ignoring any interpretation-by-a-reasonable-man of the constitution. But it
really cheers my heart that there are so many people gathered on HN who see
through the problems.

Trump is only the natural leader to this army of thugs, exactly like in 1934
in Germany. Let's hope that if your country falls into that trap, there will
be an even bigger country to come and save you, like you did for us in 1944.

~~~
tremon
_Let 's hope that if your country falls into that trap, there will be an even
bigger country to come and save you, like you did for us in 1944._

That would be Russia, China, or Canada.

~~~
Spoom
Historically, Canada has always been a release valve of sorts for abuses of
the US. Just look at the Vietnam war or (in a much larger sense) the
underground railroad.

------
ikeboy
>The largest part that we have found ... the biggest benefit has been the
identity theft,

Oh, so if I have a card in someone else's name, you'll charge it, thus causing
someone who doesn't even know about it to lose?

Any lawyers here want to weigh in on whether this would be identity
theft/credit card fraud/etc on the part of the police and hence illegal? Isn't
scanning/charging a card without authorization illegal?

~~~
droopyEyelids
This is the most interesting quote. How do these devices help in the case of
identity theft?!

How can charging a card help either the bank or the account owner in the case
of police apprehending a carder?

The only possiblity that comes to mind is that the police empty the
cardholder's account and then later return that money minus the device
manufacturer's 7.7% cut?!

~~~
ikeboy
I guess if they bought prepaid card with stolen credit cards, then the police
would empty those cards.

------
wwweston
Civil asset forfeiture needs at least these reforms:

1) Police departments cannot keep anything they seize (or proceeds from its
sale/liquidation). Incentives matter. If the funds need to go somewhere, they
should be assigned by lottery so they're not a solution to anyone's problems.
Or, perhaps have them go to the public defender's office, which is going to
need them because...

2) There absolutely has to be due process here. "Civil" is a loophole-
technicality if the reason for the seizure is a suspicion that the asset was
involved in a crime. PDs should be provided for those who don't have their own
counsel, and burden of proof should be on the state.

(I know, sending the funds to the PDs office could create a conflict of
interest. A straightforward arrangement wouldn't work; there'd have to be a
likely state-level layer of indirection and some stipulations incentivizing
the hiring of more staff rather than inflating existing staff salaries much
beyond the current exorbitant premiums PDs command. :/ )

------
technofiend
Thus begins a new round of escalation and avoidance - cash is seized? No
longer carry it. Credit Cards maxed? Keep it in a separate account and load
only as required. In an account but you can direct funds from your phone? Hand
that over.

At some point you just rely on biometrics for every transaction, it turns into
an automated shakedown scheme or you just learn to avoid the state of
Oklahoma.

~~~
brbsix
What do you think will happen if you're arrested with a thumbprint lock on
your phone? They may not be able to force you to recite your password (at
least without lengthy legal proceedings beforehand), but they can certainly
grab your finger and use it to unlock the device. They may not be able to do
this if you've only been detained, but I wouldn't chance it.

~~~
Shivetya
when you are pulled over you turn the phone OFF.

Its simple and its fast.

~~~
tremon
On the other hand, when I'm pulled over, I definitely want my phone to be
recording audio.

~~~
snuxoll
Agreed. Opening the settings and disabling the fingerprint scanner would be
easier and allow you to still use the device to record audio.

~~~
waterphone
And then you get shot because the cop saw you "reaching for a gun" instead of
putting your hands in view on the wheel as soon as you're stopped.

------
oolongCat
I come from an Asian country, we are used to bribes, crooked politicians,
government workers etc etc.

To me the USA was the place where Neil Armstrong lived, it was the country
that gave me so much that I was thankful for, it was a country where the words
"Freedom of speech" ruled above everything. To me it was the country I wanted
to be in if I had a wish.

Little by little, that idea I had of the united states is being changed, may
be its my fault since I idealised the USA too much. May be its the news I read
about, large scale surveillance, government officials who has no regard for
civil liberties, people more powerful than the FBI, people above the law,
power crazed security guards at airports etc etc.

I really really dislike this, wish I would once again get to believe that
there is a place where people are treated right.

~~~
pdkl95
I once worked with a woman who immigrated from Russia who had learned computer
science on punch cards. She was always full of energy and happy to be working
on interesting project _in the USA_ , because that kind of thing did not
happen in the USSR. In that environment, you learned to "not be noticed". Bad
things regularly happened to people that were _noticed_.

Her attitude changed in soon after the Bush administration started their wars
in the middle east and the PATRIOT act was passed. When that came up in
conversation one day, she suddenly got really serious and quietly said, "It's
happening again." The same environment she had fled from the USSR was
happening here, and it _terrified_ her.

There was a change. The USA has always had problems, but there defiantly was a
change that happened somewhat recently. I've been trying to fight it ever
since, but all that has done is convince me that it's going to get a lot
uglier before it any true reform is possible.

------
Digit-Al
As an Englishman, I have a couple of questions for you Americans on here.

1) Does anyone know who came up with these "civil asset forfeitures"?
(Personally, they seem most un-civil to me.)

2) Can any of you defend America as "the land of the free" when more of the
population are in prison than in almost any other country in the word and the
police not only have the power to strip you of your property and assets
without even needing a solid reason, but can shoot you dead and barely get a
slap on the wrist?

Not having a go at America or Americans, but it seems to me that those who
truly believe it to be a land of the free are deluding themselves.

[edit: damn keyboard]

~~~
jdavis703
It's never been "a land of the free." The original constitution didn't even
include the bill of rights because it can't be easily reconciled with slavery.

EDIT: I'm not sure why this is being downvoted. If you think it is wrong at
least state why it is wrong.

~~~
hnal943
Ridiculous. The reason the Bill of Rights was not included in the constitution
proper is that the enumerated powers clause states that the federal government
is assumed to have no authority other than that explicitly granted to it. The
Federalists were concerned that as soon as you started listing rights that
were specifically protected, people would get the idea that those were the
ONLY rights protected, which was contrary to the principle on which the nation
was founded.

~~~
arca_vorago
I wish I could upvote you more than once. This is an important factor that
during the foundation of our country that seems to be playing out in real time
in our modern times, and it's a discussion that needs to be had.

The government needs to be reminded the people are what give it any legitimacy
in the first place, and such blatant unconstitutionality needs to be
prosecuted and denounced loudly and publicly.

------
diyorgasms
I've seen it said before and I'll say it again. Anyone who works for companies
who make products like this in any capacity should be blacklisted in the
industry. The missing scruples here could fill several large containers.

~~~
elorant
Yeah, sure, let's turn that into a war between ourselves instead of demanding
better legislation and more transparency from governments. Blacklisting
individuals isn't going to solve any problem whatsoever and we run the risk of
alienating a whole bunch of people who will then might go out and do even
worst things than writing software for questionable companies.

We need laws that prevent those things. That's the only way this can be
resolved. We're a huge community with an equally huge influence and resources.
Let's coordinate and use our power for a good cause, instead of resurrecting
witch-hunting practices.

~~~
devishard
The laws you're talking about will never occur if the people making those laws
are non-technical. As an industry we need to self-regulate, and have our self-
regulation have the weight of law behind it. This system works fairly well,
for example, in the medical profession, where you can lose your license to
practice medicine based on principles set forth by other doctors.

~~~
s_q_b
That's essentially an argument for a professional licensure system for
software development.

Setting aside that professional licensure requirements are anathema to the
spirit of the hacker movement, they would likely have prevented the creation
of a massive pool of technology companies, including Apple, Microsoft, and
Facebook. Even that proposal would stifle innovation.

However, what's being suggested by the OP is not even a professional licensure
system.

It's mob justice.

The difference is that professional licensure organizations follow fixed sets
of rules, procedures, and principles. These rules are established, agreed
upon, and promulgated in advance of enforcement. Most importantly, the
procedures generally allow for the basics of due process.

Mob justice has no set of fixed procedure, and no assurance of due process.
Its enforcement is governed by caprice, and subject to a set of arbitrary,
inconsistent, and constantly shifting "rules."

The OP is proposing an arbitrarily enforced "refusal to hire" policy people
from an ill-defined set of "undesirable" companies.

First, there are no rules for establishing which companies are undesirable.

What fields of technology exactly are undesirable? And exactly how closely did
an engineer have to be involved with such technology?

Second, many companies develop "dual use" technology, which has both civilian
and military uses. This includes manufacturers of everything from CPUs to jet
engines. Is the designer of a gyroscope used on spacecraft and on missiles
banished from our ranks?

Third, many of these companies are also huge conglomerates. GE makes jet
engines, as well as washers and dryers.

Where do we draw the line?

Should a GE employee be blacklisted under this "system"? One from Intel? How
about Facebook for taking money from the CIA? Google for Boston Dynamics?

Most importantly, who decides, and how?

If it's determined by whim and popularity, as proposed by the OP, then I want
absolutely no part of it.

~~~
diyorgasms
I agree that these are all significant challenges. However I believe that in
the absence of a licensing body, we as professionals can still reach
consensus-based conclusions on minimum standards of professional ethics.

And I suspect very strongly that the engineers on this particular project
would have clearly violated any standards of professional ethics we could
agree on.

~~~
s_q_b
How, where, and by what metric is this "consensus" established? What if you
and I disagree? What if Microsoft and Apple disagree? Who decides?

Civil war amongst software developers, with utter lack of due process, and
ostracism as punishment are not as pleasant to the ear as "consensus," but
that's the end result of what you're proposing.

This, of course, misses the central flaw in the proposal: If "good" companies
refuse to hire engineers with work history at "bad" companies, you'd be
forcing the very engineers who now want to do work you consider "good" back
into doing work you consider "bad."

Setting aside the horrific personal implications this ham-fisted approach
would have, by its very nature, a refusal to hire policy would have the exact
opposite effect that you intend.

------
kstrauser
Do you want to be called pigs? Because this is how you get called pigs.

I'm a very law-and-order guy, but I have zero sympathy for police departments
who pull shenanigans like this and then bitch and moan that their communities
don't respect them. This gives limitless ammo to critics who want to paint
police as noncaring, profit-driven thugs, probably endangering officers' lives
in the process.

What an utterly despicable, contemptible move. It's simply not defensible in
any way.

~~~
jjawssd
They don't care what they are called -- they just sit back and count the dough

~~~
kstrauser
I bet the men and women on the street care a whole lot what they're called by
the people they're supposed to protect. I bet they don't like it when their
kid comes home crying because the other kids add school make fun of him for
having a police officer for a parent. They're the ones who need to speak up -
get their union involved if necessary - and tell their bureaucracies to knock
it off.

------
maxaf
This can't possibly be legal or even technically feasible. The victim can call
her bank and report a fraudulent transaction, which pits the bank against a
warrantless seizure that's impossible to defend in court. Surely banks can
catch on and frontload an "identity protection" mechanism that'll simply block
transactions from anything matching "ERAD" or however they identify themselves
to the ACH.

It's doubtful that local or state PDs have enough political pull or money to
battle banks over this through the court system.

~~~
rlpb
> which pits the bank against a warrantless seizure that's impossible to
> defend in court

Your argument could equally be applied against regular (cash) civil asset
forfeiture. The outcome is the same either way.

"Sorry, it was authorised by the authorities, nothing we can do".

You'll be short of the money until you sue, same as in regular civil asset
forfeiture. When you do sue, you'll have to prove that you're entitled to the
money, same as in regular civil asset forfeiture. What you get back will be
less legal fees, same as in regular civil asset forfeiture.

~~~
tantalor
> it was authorised by the authorities

It was _not_ authorized by the card holder or a court order, so it is fraud.

~~~
random28345
> It was not authorized by the card holder or a court order, so it is fraud.

Sorry, you're wrong. I've had the IRS steal money directly from my bank
account to pay for taxes (and fees, and fines) I didn't owe. The bank won't
help you, and I had to pay a tax lawyer $1,800 to get back $3,200 in taxes
(and fines) from the IRS for a stock sale I never made.

The bank treats withdrawals by government agencies as legitimate transactions.
They won't recognize it as fraud, and you won't get the money back from the
bank.

~~~
tantalor
I think the IRS is a special case; I'd add them to the list I gave above.

A local police department or city government does _not_ have this power.

Update: few more examples:
[http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/bankruptcy/wage-
garnishm...](http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/bankruptcy/wage-garnishment-
amount.html), apparently this is quite common; still don't think PD can do it
for this reason

~~~
Qantourisc
The IRS should NOT be a special case. They should also pass trough a court
(for what it's worth).

------
joesmo
This should firmly cement law enforcement's status as thieves rather than civi
servants. As if civil asset forfeiture didn't do that already, already making
police the #1 class of thieves in the US:
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-
took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/)

To steal and murder! The correct police motto.

------
DanielBMarkham
As a libertarian, I've seen a long line of articles that make me go Holy Cow!

It's gotten so I feel bad about it. I even apologize. Each time, I think "Well
that's it, there's nothing that could go beyond this."

Holy cow!

Several years ago I sold a small lot which had an office on it. The guy who
bought it paid cash. Cash is kinda unusual for this kind of transaction, so I
asked him where he got it. He told me that he was a general contractor and had
been saving for over ten years.

Then he told me that the previous month, while he was moving his savings to
his mom's house, he got pulled over for a bad taillight.

They almost took all of his money. Holy cow! This was my introduction to Civil
Asset Forfeiture.

There are many parts of this story that are amazing. Right away I note that if
you're truly wealthy? You have nothing to fear. You have enough assets to pay
the one lawyer who golfs with the local DA and get this thing fixed quickly.
But if you're not? If you're like my friend saving up for a large purchase?
Good freaking luck.

Read an article once from a former LE guy. I remember one of his points. He
said that cops are hunters. They hunt bad guys. We are their prey.

As we are finding out, the definition of "bad guy" is wonderfully malleable.
Just about anybody can be one. The more political power you have (whether
through contacts, as a politician, or by having money), the less likely you
are to be one.

There has been a long tradition in the states of assuming the best when
dealing with the local constable. They have tough jobs, usually the training
isn't terribly difficult, it's a good spot for people who like guns and
violence but want to be one of the good guys.

This tradition is coming to a close. While the constable himself might be a
nice enough, stand-up guy, the system as a whole is terribly corrupt and
overbearing. I might go so far as to say evil.

This cannot continue. Reforms are desperately needed.

~~~
rdtsc
> There has been a long tradition in the states of assuming the best when
> dealing with the local constable.

Heh! I came from a country where police torture people routinely. Any suspect
who lands in police custody has a good chance of being tortured. They know how
to do it, so it causes psychological distress but doesn't leave huge marks on
the body. My friend and I once caught a pickpocket and took him to a police
station. Cops were bored and proceeded to torture him behind a closed door in
order for him to reveal where his buddies were hiding. At first we were so
happy we caught the tiny criminal. By the end of the evening I felt pretty
sorry for the guy.

Anyway, that is how I see cops. Rationally I know they are not all like that,
and we are not in <oldcountry> anymore. But deep down instinctively I still
have that fear of them. It is scary and dissappointing that people in this
country are slowly starting to adopt the same attitude toward police because
of how police is acting.

> While the constable himself might be a nice enough, stand-up guy, the system
> as a whole is terribly corrupt and overbearing.

If constable ever kept this mouth shut when he saw their co-workers abuse
their power, they have stopped being a good stand-up guy at that very instant.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Yes, I understand that. Every system has good folks and bad folks. But at some
point, systems reach a state where the people trying to do good in the world
are actually part of the problem, not part of the solution. At that point, the
system itself is bad.

In the states it matters whether you torture people. Sure, bad folks get away
with it, but if you get caught, you can be assured that the system will work
against you. Same goes, mostly, for killing people without reason. Several
public incidents over the last few years have shown this. I think the trick is
to have video footage handy.

False arrest? Not so much. Police harassment? I'm sure there are cases brought
to trial, but it's really rare. Taking your money when you didn't do anything?
As we can see, that's already part of the system.

So over time, the system slips into being, for lack of a better word, "evil".
More and more stuff that was out of bounds becomes normal. Sadly, I honestly
think the reason for this is just officers trying to do a good job. Maybe
cutting a corner here or there. No evil intent required.

This is going to sound weird, but if you'd like a good example of how the US
traditionally felt about Law Enforcement, watch a few episodes of the old TV
show "The Andy Griffith Show" with Don Knotts in there. Perhaps follow that up
with a couple of episodes of "Dragnet"

These are highly-sanitized 60s shows, but it's clear that for a population who
had most men return from armed combat in WWII or Vietnam, over-zealous macho
policemen were a cause of great amusement. When real crimes did occur, the
cops were considered just part of the population, perhaps with more analytical
skills and with a job most people wouldn't like, but not that different from
anybody else.

I believe that attitude started turning in the mid 70s with the Dirty Harry
movies. Crime was considered a terrible problem, and the courts were
considered to be advocating letting criminals rampage. Then we had the
organized crime mania. Then drugs. With each public fear-fest, legislators
gave the police more and more power -- just to use against the terrible threat
of the current day, of course. It didn't work out that way. Now we have cops
using organized crime and drug laws against some yokel growing 3 pot plants in
his basement.

------
unimpressive
"News 9 obtained a copy of the contract with the state.

It shows the state is paying ERAD Group Inc., $5,000 for the software and
scanners, then 7.7 percent of all the cash the highway patrol seizes."

This is truly disgusting. I have no words.

------
rando444
You have to wonder how this works.

Like how does the officer know how much you have and how much is 'appropriate'
to confiscate?

I wonder if it does a series of authorizations looking for some sort of upper
limit to figure out how much money is in the account and then they determine
what to take from that?

Either way, this goes way beyond reason for what a trooper should be able to
do on the side of a road during a traffic stop.

~~~
alistairSH
The officer doesn't have to know. Or care. He just takes every penny the
system allows and lets you fight the DA over it at a later date. Even if the
money is returned, it doesn't cost the cop anything to try. And if they keep
the money, some moeny goes back to the police department.

~~~
rando444
Yes, but my statement was more of a technical one regarding how such a system
might work.

I am speaking about the method used to determine how much is in an account and
what can be withdrawn, because they can't check your balance without a pin
number, and if their system is issuing multiple repeated authorizations, what
protections banks have in place that might block these sorts of transactions
to prevent theft.

~~~
snuxoll
Fun fact, when running credit or debit cards you can actually get the
available balance on them. I've made the mistake of going to the gas station
when my checking account only had a couple of dollars in it, ran the card at
the pump and it let me put in exactly enough gas to 0 out my account and no
more.

------
solotronics
One more reason to keep a reserve of Bitcoins. With a hardware wallet like a
Trezor your bitcoins are secured on a physical device with a PIN and password.
The police in the US can do civil asset forfeiture on gold, cash, and now bank
accounts so obviously a more secure asset is needed. Bitcoin is that secure
asset that can be moved in a few minutes in any amount to anywhere.

------
FreedomToCreate
This seems looks like it was designed to be abused. If this is used, their
must be additional training for cops on how to make a seizure decision, and
major repercussions if they seize money from a person who is then proven to be
innocent.

------
nfriedly
> News 9 obtained a copy of the contract with the state. It shows the state is
> paying ERAD Group Inc. [...] 7.7 percent of all the cash the highway patrol
> seizes.

I think that might even be worse then the police being able to sieze all of
you money.

~~~
jandrese
It is incredibly mercenary isn't it? Does the device just send the request off
to a call center where the ERAD folks do the actual bank account drains? How
are they able to justify such a huge commission? Who in the government
negotiated this? Did they get a nice cushy job in the ERAD group after they
retired from government work?

------
Zikes
So we can't carry cash, because they'll seize that directly. This device could
probably do some sort of run around the new chip system in cards. Bitcoin is
nearly useless in the real world. So where does that leave us? Google & Apple
Pay on our phones? At least our phones can be password protected.

~~~
fucking_tragedy
And you'll get an obstruction of justice charge if you don't supply the
password then and then be found in contempt of court if you don't give it up
when you're before a judge.

~~~
adventured
Not in this case. The police legally can't pull you over and force you to
unlock your phone via password. They'd have to go through a court process, and
that's precisely where any attempt at theft will fall apart (more
specifically, as the law stands today the police won't even attempt this line
of approach because they know it'd fall apart in the court system before
they're able to steal the money).

------
rrggrr
This is the worst _systemic_ abuse of police authority in contravention of the
constitution - ever. Innocent accused will have to spend money in attorney's
fees, lost work, lost interest, opportunity costs ... to retrieve their
property. This is essentially an unlawful seizure.

------
quickben
As a canadian reading this, my instinctive reactions were: 1\. Is this a
parody of some kind?

After it turned out it's legit news:

2\. So why they simply aren't maxing out people credit cards too? I mean, by
the same flawed logic, it would stop crime if people are more in debt. You can
of course prove you aren't going to use your credit card for further crimes
and have the money returned.

Then again, I should stop giving people ideas.

------
nappy-doo
My understanding with asset seizure is that you can show why the money was
yours, and it is returned. What happens to the 7.7% taken by the servicer? Is
it automatically returned as well?

~~~
Vraxx
The state refunds it to you, the 7.7% percent is the fee the state paid in
order to withhold your funds so conveniently. The trick is you have to prove
that those withheld funds are wrongfully withheld (the burden of proof is on
the accused in this case) without access to the seized assets. In short, the
7.7% is negligible because in the cases of this abuse, you probably weren't
getting that money back anyways.

~~~
nappy-doo
What a great scam!

I need a state sponsored monopoly where my income stream is non-recourse
without chargeback possibility.

------
l3m0ndr0p
This is outrageous. The police can get away with this because they have a
weapon, a gun, which can kill you if you resist. Or at the very least, call
other cops, arrest you and throw you in jail and ruin your life while you have
to prove your you are not guilty & try to get your money back.

This defies all logic and is a clear example of the corrupt state this country
is in (USA).

~~~
hackuser
> The police can get away with this because they have a weapon

I disagree. Police can do it because they have the power of the state behind
them; the state can try you, imprison you, ruin your life, seize your other
assets, etc. That policeman's gun is a minor detail and is rarely used.

Most importantly, they have the power of the state because voters permit it.
Do you know if this is allowed in your state? Who are your state legislators?
Are you going to contact them?

------
jmuguy
I think part of this is just shoddy reporting from a local news source, I
believe this is tech they're talking about.

[https://www.erad-group.com/fci](https://www.erad-group.com/fci)

While the implications here are certainly pretty creepy, this seems more like
something to use in investigations of money laundering, etc.

~~~
Dwolb
Gosh this copy from the linked web site seems like everything that's wrong
with products in this space, "Criminals today use an array of payment cards to
purchase, transfer or conceal billions of dollars of illicit funds from Law
Enforcement"

Which criminals? The ones a local policeman happens to stop in a routine
checkpoint?

I'd like to see actual stats on what percentage of everyday criminals who are
met by local law enforcement "conceal billions of dollars".

I'd bet this percentage is so small the tool does more harm to the general
populace than good on the off chance such a criminal is caught.

~~~
tremon
_Which criminals? The ones a local policeman happens to stop in a routine
checkpoint?_

Yes, US citizens are criminals by definition of law, apparently.

------
cmurf
Turning law enforcement into highwaymen.

------
jmuguy
Are you required to surrender your credit carts, etc to the cops during a
traffic stop? What if you refuse?

~~~
VLM
Its mostly for use against prepaid gift cards and the like. Also those cheesy
pre-paid credit cards.

Supposedly its already in use at borders. The news is that now if you get
pulled over in OK the cops will now keep any gift cards they find.

Ever wonder why there's such a push to get RFID everywhere? If they RF scan
your car and find a card in the trunk now you're at minimum guilty of
obstruction.

~~~
maxaf
> If they RF scan your car and find a card in the trunk now you're at minimum
> guilty of obstruction.

Errrrrr not really! 4th Amendment gives you the right to refuse a search of
your person or vehicle. Even if the cops do find something illegal during a
search you've clearly but politely refused, your refusal will give your
defense attorney grounds to ask the court to throw out any evidence found in
the trunk.

~~~
lovich
The constitution also gives you the right to a presumption of innocence based
on
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_v._United_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_v._United_States)
but the authorities dont seem to care much about that either

------
ck2
Remember this is without trial, without immediate oversight.

Hopefully the incredulity of this will put a spotlight on civil forfeiture and
end it once and for all.

But it probably will take a decade to get to the supreme court and this will
ruin lives in the meanwhile.

And then there is who is going to fill the next three supreme court judge
slots and how they feel about "the police can do no wrong" authoritarianism.

~~~
sametmax
This is a very naive view. It will ruin life, some people will protest, but
the majority, will, as with the proverbial frog in the hot water, stay quiete.
And it will just be one additional step toward a totalitarian state. It's just
tiny steps. It will take time. But here the regularity matters.

The simple existence of the Patriot Act, which destroys the very basis of the
US legal system (the habeas corpus) and ignore blatantly the constitution,
proves that the Suprem Court is not the democratic safety net it's supposed to
be.

------
jschwartzi
I can't think of a better reason to stay out of Oklahoma.

~~~
tremon
I can't think of a better reason to stay out of the US.

~~~
odrekf
I could think some.

------
Zikes
> "If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
> money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past,"
> Vincent said about any money seized.

Literally the opposite of how presumed innocence is supposed to work.
Furthermore, good luck mounting a decent case now that they have all your
money.

------
sundvor
As a Norwegian/Australian, I'm just shaking my head reading this. Sorry, I
have nothing but reactionary drivel to add - but I wouldn't be surprised if
this was to further (if that's even possible) increase US gun violence. For
personal protection against robbery. This now appears as a marginally valid
reason for your gun ownership; if they're going to take all your assets on a
whim, leaving you with nothing to fend for, what have you got to lose? I mean,
how do you survive in the "no handout" US with no money anyway?

This is the rich looking after the rich in the most corrupt and reprehensible
way possible, see how this is going to work out for you as resentment grows in
the population roots.

~~~
djrogers
> "no handout" US

Roughly $2trillion of the nation's $3.8trillion spending in the 2015 [1]
budget was healthcare, social security, food assistance, and unemployment.
This doesn't include _any_ of the substantial spending on welfare and
'handouts' as you call them by state and local governments.

The problem isn't that we aren't willing to redistribute money, the problem is
that the politicians do a crap job of it, and do it in ways that often seem
specifically designed to keep the poor people poor.

[1] [https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/budget-
graphic....](https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/budget-graphic.png)

~~~
sundvor
Wow, this was a very useful breakdown. I certainly didn't realise the
magnitude of the social spending. Thanks.

------
visarga
>"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money it will be given back to you."

The so called presumption of guilt. I am sure everyone has the proofs and
doesn't need the money while they are held by the police.

------
ifdefdebug
"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money it will be given back to you."

\- Well my grandma saved it for me when I was a child. - Prove it. - Sorry but
she's dead and I moved it to a new bank account two years ago. - Yeah sure.

This is just disgusting.

~~~
harryh
Your comment illustrates a complete misunderstanding of the burden of proof in
these cases.

In the situation you describe a simple bank statement from "2 years ago" would
be more than enough to meet the "preponderance of evidence" standard for these
cases.

~~~
matt_wulfeck
More than a misunderstanding: an intentional abuse.

------
hyperliner
DHS' page on this:

[https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/prepaid-card-
read...](https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/prepaid-card-reader-aids-
seizing-fraudulent-cards)

------
ible
Cops and robbers really means something different these days.

~~~
masmullin
Johnny: OK Billy, lets play Cops and Robbers

Billy: SURE! I get to be the Cop and the Robber, you play the innocent citizen
and I'll take all your money after pulling you over for speeding!

Johnny & Billy simultaneously: YAAAYYYYYYYYY

------
lasermike026
What does this say about the security of our electronic funds? Gold bugs are
going to have a field day with this.

~~~
fucking_tragedy
Banks are to your personal funds what 'the cloud' is to your personal data.

------
pklausler
What are the practical means of defense against these thieves with badges?

~~~
tremon
Be white and wear a suit.

------
jitix
This is physically repulsive and literal theft by the state. Do other
developed countries (EU, Canada, etc.) have similar laws?

------
kyleblarson
It's called a flyover state for a reason.

------
_audakel
> _It shows the state is paying ERAD Group Inc., $5,000 for the software and
> scanners, then 7.7 percent of all the cash the highway patrol seizes._

If your cash is seized the police will go ahead and keep the full amount less
the 7.7% fee. So what happens if the person is proven innocent? Does the
police dept have to use its own funding to repay the 7.7% fee?

This seems unlikely to me (but that is based on no facts). Or does the company
have to repay the money? It would seem like they could legally say they
preformed a service and should not be required to refund the money.

Sadly it looks like if you are seen as "potential guilty" and your assets are
seized, even if you are proven innocent you still lost 7.7% of your money.
Then tack on legal fees associated with proving your innocent.....

------
programmarchy
Seems like a good use case for Bitcoin.

~~~
mywittyname
Bitcoin support is coming in 2017.

~~~
odrekf
Just keep your private keys encrypted. Ever heard of Trezor? Encrypted paper
wallets? Brain wallets?

------
googletazer
"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past"

Absolutely terrible. Finally bitcoin et al have a legitimate use - protecting
your property from grubby government hands.

------
retube
It blows my mind this is even technically possible. Surely the target needs to
enter a pin or something in order for the bank to authorise the transaction.

That said seizing cash whether physical notes or electronic must be subject to
due process and a court order.

------
andyjdavis
>We've seen where the money goes and how it's been misspent

Serious question, where does the money go and how is it spent? Who is it spent
by?

We do have a process for the confiscation of proceeds of crime here in
Australia. I believe the money goes into a big pot controlled by a federal
government department ([https://www.afsa.gov.au/](https://www.afsa.gov.au/) ie
not the police) to be spent on community projects. I am sure that there is
plenty of scope for waste etc but if nothing else the system would seem to do
a good job of removing any financial incentives for the police to seize stuff.

------
gherkin0
This is total, corrupt bullshit. How the fuck is a traffic cop supposed to
ascertain the origin of the money in your accounts, let alone if it was from
the "the commission of a crime?"

~~~
visarga
> "We're gonna look for different factors in the way that you're acting. We're
> gonna look for if there's a difference in your story. If there's someway
> that we can prove that you're falsifying information to us about your
> business."

If you seem suspicious, or if they claim so, then your money suddenly is not
yours any more, until you prove their source. If you can't prove the
legitimity of your money, they become fair game to be confiscated. In this
whole process you personally are not charged with anything, but the
confiscation is triggered by their being suspicious about you.

------
dmitrygr
Repeat after me:

"No, officer, you may not see my wallet. I do not consent to a search of
myself, my vehicle, or my property. I furthermore, refuse to have any further
conversation with you. May I go now, or am I under arrest?"﻿

Works every time for me.

------
adrenalinelol
So they can drain your bank account... Then you'll need to hire a lawyer
(after you've lost all your money) to prove you're innocent? Does ERAD give
back the 7% fee? This has turned policemen into highwaymen.

------
japhyr
So a highway patrol officer can ask to see my license, and I'm supposed to
show it.

Now they're asking to see my entire wallet?! I'm assuming we're all well
within our rights to refuse to hand over our wallets?

~~~
matt_wulfeck
This is a good question and I like a non-IANAL response. As far as I can tell
police officers assume any resistance to request as proof of guilt. This kind
of thinking has happened historically in the past and there's no reason to
believe it's not happening now.

~~~
Declanomous
I believe searching your car and searching your person constitute two entirely
different searches. If your wallet is on the seat next to you, the police
could theoretically use that as grounds for a search. If your wallet is in
your pocket, and they take your wallet off you as part of a search of your
vehicle, you'd probably have a better chance of successfully claiming
unreasonable search and seizure.

I'm not a lawyer either though, so take that for what it is worth.

~~~
odrekf
In many places you won't have a chance of doing anything. Just do a quick
search in youtube and watch all the people being robbed, beaten, raped, and
killed by the police. That's the power they have now.

------
twinkletwinkle
Reason #19836 not to go to Oklahoma...

------
daveheq
So you're guilty until proven innocent, police are spending the money, and
7.7% is going to the manufacturer; sounds like a racket!

------
awqrre
They figured that if they can steal your cash without any consequences that
they should go further, wow. What will it be next, your home?

~~~
MertsA
That's been a thing for a very long time now. Heck there was even a case where
a family's son was caught selling a small amount of heroin on their front
porch so the police threw them out on the street and stole their house.

[http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/us/philadelphia-drug-bust-
hous...](http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/us/philadelphia-drug-bust-house-
seizure/)

What's more shocking is the following quote from that article:

>Philadelphia officials seized more than 1,000 houses, about 3,300 vehicles
and $44 million in cash, totaling $64 million in civil forfeitures over a
10-year period

------
GigabyteCoin
>"We're gonna look for different factors in the way that you're acting,”
Oklahoma Highway Patrol Lt. John Vincent said. “We're gonna look for if
there's a difference in your story. If there's someway that we can prove that
you're falsifying information to us about your business."

So basically... guilty until proven innocent?

------
balls187
> If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
> money it will be given back to you.

I am dumbfounded by this statement.

------
zyxley
Sounds like there's now a market in Oklahoma for cards that are debit-only and
will automatically reject all credit transactions.

~~~
kirykl
They'll just use pinless debit

------
x1798DE
I think this is the first time I've thought it would be useful to have a
device like the ill-fated Coin. Not that I keep money on prepaid cards, but if
I did, it would be nice to back up my cards at home so that if stopped by the
police I could pre-emptively delete the memory of the meta-card.

------
masmullin
If citizens united proved that money is speech, does civil forfeiture not
impede on the first amendment?

~~~
harryh
Citizens United did not prove that simple ownership of money is speech. So no,
it does not.

------
a3n
Why should I have to prove anything about myself to the government if I'm not
suspected of a crime? Merely having some of what everyone else has - money,
drugs, etc - doesn't itself make me suspect. It just makes me a target.

------
gohrt
The article headline is an obscene lie. "OHP Uses New Device To Seize Money
Used During The Commission Of A Crime"

The article is a balanced analysis that speaks truth to power, but the
headline is statist propaganda.

------
Negative1
7.7%!? WOW! They really hustled those cops. I always hear how difficult it is
to work with schools, law enforcement, basically most gov agencies. Surprising
to see how well that company played the cops in this instance.

~~~
jjawssd
The cops don't get played at all. They still make more than they would
otherwise with this approach -- which used to be zero.

------
apo
Oklahoma is not an outlier:

[http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/](http://ij.org/report/policing-for-
profit/)

------
orbitingpluto
Remember, tribute is required when traveling through the United States.

Wow, so it's now safest to travel around the country with your encrypted
Bitcoin hid steganographically....

------
BrittTheIsh
Isn't there a limit to what police can ask you to provide during a traffic
stop? How is it legal that they can ask to see your debit / credit cards?

~~~
Sacho
Yes, there is -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop)

Consider, however, that the law in theory differs very much from its practice.
In a Terry stop, just like most encounters with the police, the officer holds
all the cards. Non-compliance can be met with force, and there's always the
threat of being charged for obstruction or whatever else the policeman thinks
up, based on their word alone(which has more weight than yours in court).
Policemen are given a wide latitude to act, and a good faith presumption to
all their actions, so they can get away with stretching any applicable law to
its breaking point.

------
hackaflocka
I wonder if the same companies that make these cards also make the devices
that allow extrication of money from seized cards.

------
NotSammyHagar
This is pretty horrible. How can this happen.... Taking advantage of poor, the
weak, it is just the lowest.

------
Havoc
>"If you can prove can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money

aka Guilty until proven innocent.

------
elliottcarlson
Does anyone know if pre-paid cards will be required to go chip-in-card due to
the EMV liability shift?

------
Scoundreller
> We would be happy to introduce you to some of our clients. Please call us at
> 571-207-ERAD (3723)

Call now!

------
tslug
Woo. I wonder if this news could spark a wee run on the banks?

------
trbvm2
Booster for crypto-currency

------
ivanstojic
I guess I'm never visiting Oklahoma.

------
moosetafa
Yet one more reason to stay away from a shithole like Oklahoma. All that jesus
worshiping has completely fried their brains.

------
millzlane
From my cold dead fingers.

------
alistproducer2
Seems legit.

------
mrhargro
puke

------
moribondus
The police will keep encroaching until they meet some kind of resistance,
which will not easily materialize because people here would be the first ones
to utterly condemn respect-instilling reprisals.

If everybody else around you accepts to get arbitrarily molested in the butt,
you either accept it too, or else you move out.

I have personally chosen to move out. Unfortunately, you can see the United
Nations, USAID, international NGOs and similar organizations coming over here
to convince the locals to accept similar abuse from their own government, by
advocating "the rule of law". Of course, there are also the Christian
organizations advocating to the locals to offer their other cheek to such
thefting police.

Since I cannot keep "moving away", at some point I will have no other option
than to finally make a stand.

The _Art of War_ says that the secret of success consists in never letting the
enemy choose the time and the place. You must always choose the time and the
place by yourself. Therefore, it suggests that it is us who must schedule
forceful attacks against the police. Seriously, I am all for it.

~~~
jeffdavis
The chance of a random fight against police accomplishing anything good is 0%.
The chance it makes things worse is 100%.

And organizing violence is not particularly easy. For something like civil
forfeiture, it would be much easier to just follow the democratic process.

So collect signatures, call representatives, state legislators, and stage
protests at city halls. A lot less painful for all parties, and a greater
chance of success.

------
jbigelow76
They took a whole Christian band? Are they going to be shackled and forced to
play county fairs and police fund raisers for the rest of their lives?

~~~
smellf
Why is his statement so ungrammatical?

~~~
tn13
I think these people get only few seconds to make their point. They have to
make it quickly while using all the right buzzwords to hit the note. Also it
is a good idea to keep it low on details because they the opponents focus on
the details he got wrong while conveniently avoiding the larger important
point.

------
PhrosTT
What the fuck is happening to this country?

~~~
superuser2
People want large, busybody police departments and they don't want to pay the
taxes that entails.

Police departments found a way to fund themselves without pissing off anyone
who matters politically.

~~~
WDCDev
Police unions want large busybody departments and they don't care who pays.
They just know that once a new police officer is hired SOMEONE will pay.

~~~
Loughla
No, people want large, busybody departments. It makes them feel safe. They
don't want to increase their taxes, though, especially in conservative states
such as Oklahoma.

~~~
imtringued
I don't think robbery makes anyone feel safe.

------
eonw
From Article: "If you can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that
money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past," Vincent
said about any money seized.

Under no circumstance should i have to PROVE where my money came from nor how
i got it. this is assumed guilt and utterly unamerican IMO. Where is the
burden of proof that must be reached before taking my assets and forcing me to
prove that i have the right to have them. OK = backwoods state full of
backwoods laws, and apparently backwoods people that keep voting for these
types of idiots.

~~~
dang
> _backwoods state full of backwoods laws, and apparently backwoods people_

Attacking an entire population of people like that is a nasty breach of HN's
civility rule. Please don't ever post anything like this again.

It's the upvoters of such comments who should most be ashamed of themselves.
The fact that people here feel angry about police seizing cash without due
process can, and must, be kept distinct from cheap slurs. That takes a certain
(rather tiny) degree of self-discipline, which is a minimum requirement for
participating here.

~~~
eonw
i did not attack them, i said "apparently" meaning it would seem that they are
based on the things they allow and agree to. if you allow backwoods laws to be
passed and enforced... well you know, if the shoe fits.

furthermore being called backwoods is only an attack if you choose it to be,
some people don't mind being unsophisticated.

------
fapjacks
This is the crux here. The "rule of law" is equivalent to "rule of men in
black with automatic weapons". If you call the police, you are just
outsourcing your violence to the men in black uniforms with automatic weapons.
Because at the end of the day, they will use force. The "rule of law" is not
"let's have a reasonable conversation about the issues".

~~~
jMyles
"Rule of law" is supposed to mean that, absent adherence to its letter, self-
defense with weapons of your own is not only proper but essential in order for
liberty to persevere.

Although your anarchic mindset is appealing to me, I'm less ready to give up
on the phrase and concept of "rule of law," which I think still has a place in
a free information age.

~~~
dimino
It's literally meant to mean the opposite of that.

~~~
jMyles
Huh?

------
agoa
If only we could get similar technology in London?

[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-is-now-
the...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/london-is-now-the-global-
money-laundering-centre-for-the-drug-trade-says-crime-expert-10366262.html)

------
Roboprog
Welcome to the post-Reagan era, kids. This stuff really took off during the
80s war on drugs. (which is about as successful as the war on alcohol was -
for gangsters dealing)

If only Thatcherism / Reaganism never happened... (and Laffer, Friedman and
all the other related right wing propaganda that's been catapulted down our
throats)

I suppose things will eventually get bad enough that people will eventually
realize "Everything that demented old man proposed was wrong?!?" (demented as
in literal "alzheimer's patient")

~~~
woodman
Have you got a specific beef with Friedman, or are you just generally
complaining about prominent conservatives from the 80s? What position did he
take that would support civil asset forfeiture?

~~~
Roboprog
No, you're right. Just complaining about right wing thuggery in general :-)

~~~
woodman
Ah, well you might want to stick to a more defensible complaint - because two
sentences is all it took to make you look like an uninformed loon.

------
iancarroll
The DHS says this is only for prepaid cards, which are more likely to be
fraudulent: [https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/prepaid-card-
read...](https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/prepaid-card-reader-aids-
seizing-fraudulent-cards)

~~~
protomyth
Which are used mostly by poor people since banking is often out of bounds for
them. Nice we attack the people who cannot pay.

Sure glad the local police didn't have one of those when they were doing their
first of the month car stops.

