---

Are Asset Forfeiture Laws Fair and Constitutional? Stealing Your Money and Property These Days is Easy for a Greedy Govt’ With Unfair Policies of Punishment by Pillage.

---

Asset forfeiture laws describe the process of the government confiscating the property of citizens in relation to a crime or alleged crime.

The issue is our government seizes property even before a suspect is found to be guilty.

Initially, forfeiture laws were designed primarily to attack organized crime due to the fact that detectives found it incredibly difficult to pin organized criminals with any serious crimes.

In order to undermine organized criminal enterprises, forfeiture proceedings are used because it is believed that it can defeat organized crime.

Until recently, forfeiture law did not have many regulations and gave the government a free pass to basically confiscate whatever they wanted from whomever they wanted without having to prove their case in court to a reasonable degree.

But recent events have seen the implementation of asset forfeiture laws undergoing reforms, and new restrictions and limitations have been imposed on government activities in relation to asset forfeiture cases.

Claimants are no longer required to pay for a ten percent bond just for the right to contest the case in court, and the court must now appoint legal counsel for those whom cannot afford it.

The government, according to new legal reforms, is not allowed to confiscate property without having proved their case, nor are they allowed to confiscate the property of individuals whom have proven their innocence.

Whether or not governments abuse the system, many critics have been calling for even more asset forfeiture reforms at an increasing rate.

---

---

Proving Innocence Difficult

Many times citizens find it becomes a very difficult process to prove that their property was not involved in a crime, or that they did not have knowledge of a crime.

Proving a negative can quickly deteriorate into an impossible situation, because proving something does not exist is far more difficult than proving something does exist.

Under many civil asset forfeiture laws, simply having a large amount of cash can be considered evidence of a crime, despite that it may not always be the case.

Under circumstances such as this, many citizens may find complex court proceedings to be too difficult to handle, and may simply forfeit the property without a fight because the cost of the court battles can quickly overwhelm the cost of the contested property.

---

Forfeiture Corrupt Law Enforcement

When law enforcement agencies are granted the authority to confiscate property from citizens and then liquidate it into funding for their organization, it essentially grants them the incentives to continue confiscating more assets regardless of the situation.

Those who have assets will become likely targets because they have the most to seize.

When law enforcement and court officials are granted a percentage of the sales from auctioned assets seized through forfeiture cases, it grants them personal incentives to continue the practice and to increase their seizures.

This invites corruption and abuse and can create a dangerous situation within society.

---

Organized Crime

Since the original justification for asset forfeiture laws was to undermine organized crime and harm the business of drug cartels or other smuggling operations, one may expect that it would have an effect on lowering organized criminal activities.

It may also be expected that, if such methodology cannot be shown to actually prevent the crimes it sets out to stop, than it would not be pursued in any legitimate manner any longer.

This is not the case however, as organized crime has been increasing at a steady rate for years.

Drug trafficking activities are still commonplace throughout the nation, and black market trade continues to grow more profitable.

Asset forfeiture laws have been shown to be highly ineffective in preventing organized crime and many critics have been arguing that these laws either be completely reformed or taken off the books altogether.

---

---