Every single person involved in this operation through the entire chain of command should be dismissed, named publicly, and barred from any future law enforcement role and face criminal charges. All victims should get complete restitution, and the assets of offenders should be used to finance additional compensation. Ditto for all other instances of armed robbery committed by law enforcement, whether they branded it as “civil asset forfeiture” or some other bureaucratic euphemism.
Armed robbery is the flattest, least hyperbolic, actually nicest way to label it, because a normal armed robber doesn't get to do it in broad daylight in front of witnesses behind a badge. The victims can at least hope to maybe call the police on a normal armed robber.
Being the police while doing it really deserves some whole extra order of magnitude of consequences.
Also to be fair, the Biden DOJ did just stop it, after the DEA failed to uphold their promises to track each such encounter and provide adequate training and oversight.
The order to stop the program of "consensual searches" at mass transportation facilities was sent out on November 12, and the more detailed report that I linked to on November 21st. Do you have knowledge of these DEA consensual searches happening at airports or other mass transit hubs after November 12?
Or are you referring to broader law enforcement attempts to do consensual searches or civil asset forfeiture seizures, which are absolutely still a problem?
I guess my point is, there are still massive problems with the way policing happens in this country. But the Biden administration has ordered this particular problematic behavior to end, specifically in response to the incident brought up in this article.
So, are you just making vague generalizations, or do you have actual knowledge that this program has not ended?
Civil asset forfeiture, including by the DEA, is still very much a thing. Having a President end it in airports affects some tiny fraction of the broader problem.
And it only ends it until a future admin un-ends it. I could see both democrats and republicans deciding that they will allow this practice again.
I think it's much more correct to call the practice "paused" until we legislate it away. "Ending" implies a finality we cannot possibly be comfortable with.
Yeah, I agree with you that there are larger problems that still need to be addressed; and that this stop isn't necessarily permanent, but something temporary that might come back once there are more controls in place.
But situations like this are nuanced and complex, and we are in a better position than we were a month ago, due to actions by the Biden administration.
It is easy, especially in cases of such long running problems like civil asset forfeiture, to get cynical and fall into the mentality that there's nothing that can be done. That's not the case. It is possible to improve things, through political and legal processes. Not always as easy as you would like. Frequently slower, and with regressions. But progress is possible, and it's worth keeping track of who makes that progress to inform future voting patterns.
Cynicism can be an effective tool to blunt efforts at reform.
I believe it's possible to improve things. I don't think this is an example of a material change. I, personally, find both the incoming and outgoing administrations to be truly repellant.
But where it makes sense to do so, I will give credit.
This just feels like something that can be undone with a few minutes of trump's time. If it stays paused then great. And I'm sure halting the practice even for a few months does material good for people, I just can't give more credit when the Biden admin could do much more to halt it.
How is this any different to auditors or penetration testers doing a crap job? The payment might be in the form of bonuses or more work billed, but it’s just not realistic.
