If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Post)   Some Guy: "I calculate that my cash-on-hand falls well below the $10,000 threshold." Border Gestapo: :: Clikka-clikka :: "Nope. Sorry, Citizen. We are, however, grateful for the much-needed boost to Stephen Harper's Sweater Vest Fund"   (news.nationalpost.com) divider line 152
    More: Stupid, Bank of Canada, detector dog, exchange rates, borders, Pearson International Airport, Federal Court of Appeal  
•       •       •

14880 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Apr 2013 at 6:31 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



152 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-04 08:27:30 AM

I just did a shortish, half-ass paper on this for school. In Tennessee for example, the threshold is $100.


Thats right. $100. If you are carrying more than that in cash, and you get pulled over in one of their little speed traps or "color" traps, and you are carrying more than that, they take it. Alabama, it's $500.



One Linky-Dinky

Two Linky-Dinky

Three Linky-Dinky

Basically, when you get your money stolen by the cops, you are funding Department parties, aquisition of some pretty exotic weaponry and equipment including state-of-the-art helicopter gunships such as AH-64 Apaches (yes, fully armed), heavy equipment like bulldozers, excavators and farm tractors that are mysteriously resold to Sheriffs brothers for pennies, expensive firearms such as Connecticut Shotguns and Purdy Best ($120,000/pair) that are resold by the Departments for cash, multi-tenthousand dollar bonuses for individual Police officers, (one in a small town in southeastern California was making $120,000 as a cop, AND getting $80-$90 thousand per year in bonus money based on all the cash he'd confiscated over the previous fiscal quarter.

The system is robbing you, and it's all legal. And yes, they WILL shoot you dead to confiscate your property through the Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws. They don't have to arrest you, they don't have to charge you with a crime at all. They charge your PROPERTY with suspicion of involvement, and you aren't allowed to even hire a lawyer to defend it.
 
2013-04-04 08:30:19 AM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?


It's the cash value (currency equivalent) of whatever you're carrying.  Coins, bank notes, traveller's checks, cash, even the prepaid credit cards proposed by theknuckler_33are subject to mandatory reporting if the value is over $10k.
 
2013-04-04 08:31:31 AM

MythDragon: Bucky Katt: FTFA: a currency detector dog

I had no idea there was such a thing.  Now I'm scared.

Just wait until you get hit up by the fruit beagle. I was coming back from Japan, and there was a military group who had come back from the same flight. We were waiting to pick up our bags so we could go clear customs and the fruit beagle starts sniffing this one guy's back (who is in full uniform, BTW) The agent makes him open his bag and finds an orange and loses his shiat. "Sir! This is an undeclared orange! You ARE NOT PERMITTED to bring fruit into this country! Did you not READ THE RULES??"

The guy tries to explain they gave him the orange on the damn plane and he was just saving it for later. The agent says "Sir, you are bringing OUT OF COUNTRY fruit INTO THE COUNTRY. You CANNOT do that!. You need to come with me now!"

The haul the guy off somewhere, and I didn't see him again by the time I had gotten my bags and cleared customs.


This is a good example of how if you looked up why a rule existed, you wouldn't be so indignant.

There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit.  It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these.  In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.

What's worse is that most countries have rather differing policies on what pesticides are permissible, what genetically modified foods are growable, etc., and so most countries cannot trust other countries to have policed their fruit according to the way the receiving nation wants.

For example, since 2011 many countries have been dealing with an infestation of the Khapra beetle, and so you cannot import dried rice without permission into the US.  This isn't because the government is necessarily worried about intentionally polluting our food supply, but rather that we're worried about accidentally importing a devastating parasite.
 
2013-04-04 08:35:07 AM

Deathfrogg: The system is robbing you, and it's all legal. And yes, they WILL shoot you dead to confiscate your property through the Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws. They don't have to arrest you, they don't have to charge you with a crime at all. They charge your PROPERTY with suspicion of involvement, and you aren't allowed to even hire a lawyer to defend it.


Ah, well, don't appear lower class while driving.
 
2013-04-04 08:36:40 AM
looks like subby is trying to create a  new definition for "well below".
 
2013-04-04 08:38:24 AM
Coming up next week on Border Security, on Global
 
2013-04-04 08:40:12 AM

doglover: bighairyguy: Why do stupid people always seem to have more money than I do?

They take bigger risks.

It's why Roman Polanski is a wanted child molester instead of a beloved director whose wife died in a most horrible way. It's because he dared to dream he could be a director while you were making sound financial decisions. It's also why he dared to dream he could corn hole a 14 year old and again dared to dream he could get away with it in France.

Well all of his dreams came true.


I think you just invented the term "Polanski'd A Thread"
 
2013-04-04 08:40:50 AM

yukichigai: MadSkillz: Side note: This guy taking just under the legal limit seems ... less than legit.

Yeah.  Especially via international travel.  Doubly especially because, as far as I know, declaring that you have more than 10k in cash is f%$#ing easy as hell.  Yeah, they'll ask for some paperwork maybe, but it's not a ton.


I've done it once... after a particularly good run at the Blackjack tables in Vegas, which pushed me just a little over the 10k limit. I just asked the TSA (after I got through security) to call over Customs to make a currency export declaration. 10 minutes later, the guy shows up, hands me a form, chats casually with me, accepts my declaration (didn't count the money himself, he accepted it as written as it was a voluntary declaration) and I went on my way. Back into Canada, I checked the box marked "more than $10k in currency" on the Canada Customs form, they asked me how much, wrote it on the form, and sent me on my way.

It's not hard at all, and I was only asked "how'd you get the money?" wherein I replied "won big at the blackjack tables". This guy was trying to smuggle the cash - didn't want any records or questions at all, even though they are pretty much all thrown in a large database to never be referred to again.
 
2013-04-04 08:48:07 AM

Babwa Wawa: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?

It's the cash value (currency equivalent) of whatever you're carrying.  Coins, bank notes, traveller's checks, cash, even the prepaid credit cards proposed by theknuckler_33are subject to mandatory reporting if the value is over $10k.


That doesn't apply to jewelry. You can go to Rio de Jenario or Mexico City, spend a few weeks selling machine guns or heroin or cocaine and make $10 Million or $100 Million, buy a few dozen exotic wristwatches an dother such things, put them in your luggage or just wear them, and walk through customs without the customs officers giving them a second glance. Incidentally, NASDAQ and the NYSE and investment banks such as Goldmann-Sachs are specifically exempted from the money-laundering laws. You can sell $50 million worth of cocaine every year, deposit it in a bank account in Lichtenstein, Monaco or the Cayman Islands, and as long as you funnel that cash into the stock markets the Federal government doesn't give a damn.

Several papers I read during the course of my research into the Civil Asset Forfeitures game seemed to show that, if we took all the illegal weapons and drug money out of the United States stock exchanges, the system would collapse, utterly. About 25% of ALL Stock transactions in the United States is based on drug money alone.

You want to win the drug war? Start busting the Banks, because they are becoming extremely wealthy laundering that cash. Mitt Romney made several tens of Millions of Dollars in that game back in the 80's and early 90's. Thats what his little Caymann Island Bank was created for. Specifically to facilitate the drug cartel's shifting their billions into the US Stock markets. thats why he was considered too dirty to run for President back in '04, the Statutes of Limitations hadn't run out yet.
 
2013-04-04 08:48:38 AM
i1151.photobucket.com
What $10,000 can buy you at Target.
 
2013-04-04 08:50:46 AM
I just don't get the point. Why bother risking what amounts to less than my monthly  paycheck? is there really an underground cash economy sufficient to eschew electronic funds that one can maintain any kind of lifestyle on? Either he's so poor that $10,000 is like, his life savings or something and now he's broke, or he's terminally stupid...
 
2013-04-04 08:51:14 AM

mattharvest: There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit. It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these. In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.


Then don't hand them out on the farking plane. I'm not disagreeing with you because those rules are there for a long list of very good reasons. But are we so incomplete that we can't go twelve or fourteen hours without a fresh fruit that will probably just taste like vaseline at 30,000 feet anyway?
 
2013-04-04 08:52:09 AM

Deathfrogg: I just did a shortish, half-ass paper on this for school. I


Here's the problem: none of the sources you link to provide any (i.e. more than zero) information about actual use of these laws.  While they point to the volume of the seizure accounts in a few jurisdictions, they don't provide a single link to an actual case where the forfeiture was inappropriate.

Moreover, they seem blithely wrong about the law (including the Cato one): you can always bring a lawyer to any legal proceeding in the courts (except Small Claims, where there are a few restrictions in some places).  Just because you're not given a free one doesn't mean you don't have the right to have an attorney there.

There's no doubt that it's possible these laws are abused, but you cannot just assume they're being abused.  If it's so common, why were those sources completely unable to even present one example, much less any sort of valid data sets?
 
2013-04-04 08:53:39 AM

Flakeloaf: mattharvest: There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit. It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these. In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.

Then don't hand them out on the farking plane. I'm not disagreeing with you because those rules are there for a long list of very good reasons. But are we so incomplete that we can't go twelve or fourteen hours without a fresh fruit that will probably just taste like vaseline at 30,000 feet anyway?


Well, now you're complaining about the particular airline that handed out the fruit (lord, I don't think I've ever received fruit on a plane since the 80s).  The airline isn't the nation's customs enforcement agency.
 
2013-04-04 08:55:21 AM
If you are close, just declare it.

/now it's easier to just use bitcoin
 
2013-04-04 08:56:06 AM

willfullyobscure: I just don't get the point. Why bother risking what amounts to less than my monthly  paycheck? is there really an underground cash economy sufficient to eschew electronic funds that one can maintain any kind of lifestyle on? Either he's so poor that $10,000 is like, his life savings or something and now he's broke, or he's terminally stupid...


There are banks in this world where the minimum required balance is $100 Million or more, several with minimum balance requirements of $1 Billion. Those banks are "private". They are exempt from nearly every money laundering law there is. They're the sort of place where you call the manager, and set up an appointment and they send a Rolls Royce limousine to pick you up and take you to the Bank to do your business.

It's much easier to borrow $100 Million, than it is to borrow $100,000.
 
2013-04-04 08:56:38 AM

Flakeloaf: mattharvest: There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit. It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these. In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.

Then don't hand them out on the farking plane. I'm not disagreeing with you because those rules are there for a long list of very good reasons. But are we so incomplete that we can't go twelve or fourteen hours without a fresh fruit that will probably just taste like vaseline at 30,000 feet anyway?


They gave you the fruit to eat on the plane, not to take with you.  And like mattharvest said I've never seen an airline give out fresh fruit.
 
2013-04-04 08:57:00 AM

mrlewish: Meanwhile bankers move around billions of dollars in tax avoidance slush funds over international boarders everyday.



Yeah, 10 thousand is not really that much money. Try buying a house  with 10 thousand.
 
2013-04-04 08:58:49 AM

Babwa Wawa: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?

It's the cash value (currency equivalent) of whatever you're carrying.  Coins, bank notes, traveller's checks, cash, even the prepaid credit cards proposed by theknuckler_33are subject to mandatory reporting if the value is over $10k.


Right, but a currency dog isn't going to sniff out a prepaid card.

Of course if they raised the stupid customs allowance, you wouldn't have a whole population of us living close to the border who are experienced at, say, wearing several sweaters through customs.
 
2013-04-04 09:03:51 AM

mattharvest: Deathfrogg: I just did a shortish, half-ass paper on this for school. I

Here's the problem: none of the sources you link to provide any (i.e. more than zero) information about actual use of these laws.  While they point to the volume of the seizure accounts in a few jurisdictions, they don't provide a single link to an actual case where the forfeiture was inappropriate.

Moreover, they seem blithely wrong about the law (including the Cato one): you can always bring a lawyer to any legal proceeding in the courts (except Small Claims, where there are a few restrictions in some places).  Just because you're not given a free one doesn't mean you don't have the right to have an attorney there.

There's no doubt that it's possible these laws are abused, but you cannot just assume they're being abused.  If it's so common, why were those sources completely unable to even present one example, much less any sort of valid data sets?


Thats just it. There are no court proceedings involved. They are not required to tell you anything,  you are not the one being charged. The cash (or other property) is the suspect in the case. One case I read was a pair of brothers traveling from Central Illinois to Mississippi to buy an excavator for their construction business. They had all the proper legal documents in order, and the $22,000 they had in cash for the down payment was all they had saved over the previous few years. The money was taken in Tennessee, and they had no spare money to hire a lawyer unless they cashed out all their other assets. In any case, as YOU are not the individual being charged, only the money, there are no requirements for Law Enforcement to notify YOU of anything.

The courts are almost never involved unless YOU file the lawsuit.
 
2013-04-04 09:06:31 AM

mattharvest: Flakeloaf: mattharvest: There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit. It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these. In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.

Then don't hand them out on the farking plane. I'm not disagreeing with you because those rules are there for a long list of very good reasons. But are we so incomplete that we can't go twelve or fourteen hours without a fresh fruit that will probably just taste like vaseline at 30,000 feet anyway?

Well, now you're complaining about the particular airline that handed out the fruit (lord, I don't think I've ever received fruit on a plane since the 80s).  The airline isn't the nation's customs enforcement agency.


I have gotten fruit on every single transatlantic flight (to and from the US) I've been on in the last ten years and I don't think I've used a single carrier more than once per round-trip. So yeah, if it's that much of a problem, FFS stop passing out fruit to people.
 
2013-04-04 09:12:29 AM

Deathfrogg: Thats just it. There are no court proceedings involved. They are not required to tell you anything,  you are not the one being charged. The cash (or other property) is the suspect in the case. One case I read was a pair of brothers traveling from Central Illinois to Mississippi to buy an excavator for their construction business. They had all the proper legal documents in order, and the $22,000 they had in cash for the down payment was all they had saved over the previous few years. The money was taken in Tennessee, and they had no spare money to hire a lawyer unless they cashed out all their other assets. In any case, as YOU are not the individual being charged, only the money, there are no requirements for Law Enforcement to notify YOU of anything.

The courts are almost never involved unless YOU file the lawsuit.


When you use the wrong words for things, it makes me think you didn't research this well.

When you file a replevin - which isn't a lawsuit, actually, since you're not suing anyone - you're requesting the return of your property.  Doing this has a minimal filing  fee (as all court proceedings do).  Here in Maryland, it's a trivial process: you serve a copy on the seizing agency and the State's Attorney's office, and you show up for your hearing.  The State then has the burden of showing why it should not be returned (by default, you get it back if you ask and in fact, much of the time the State simply declines to hold a hearing and agrees to the return).

This is true in every state of which I'm aware.

No one, including the property, is being 'charged' with anything.  Don't use inflammatory rhetoric.

I notice that, in the anecdote you include here, you don't include any discussion of what efforts - legal or otherwise - these brothers made to get their money back, to document their money, etc.  Did either of them bother to make themselves aware of the statutes relating to carrying around $22,000 in cash?  Did either of them bother to document any of their income?  If they reported all this as income, it should be trivial to bring in their documents.

Additionally, I have never in my life - including years of prosecuting economic crime - heard of a construction company that was going to legitimately sell a piece of equipment for $22k in cash.  If nothing else, they'd have to subsequently deposit that in their bank accounts and large cash deposits trigger a whole bunch of issues (including freezing your account for investigations, etc.) that they'd never suffer.

There is zero reason whatsoever that, in a legitimate transaction, those 'brothers' wouldn't have used a variety of means (e.g. money orders, wire transfers, standard bank transfers, etc.) that would have avoided the whole hassle.
 
2013-04-04 09:15:03 AM

abhorrent1: I love how they can arbitrarily decide the money you have is proceeds of a crime and just take it. And why is it only $10k and over can be the result of a crime? Maybe he was going to a casino.


10k$ in cash that you _refuse to declare_ probably is the result of a crime.  Kind of like how if when you're pulled over you lie about having a firearm in your car, then one is found when you're searched for whatever probable cause: it's entirely reasonable to think there's something fishy about the gun in question.

Had he declared the cash at customs like he _obviously_ knew he had to, given his attempt to tune it specifically to the limit, then it would not have been an issue.

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?


Well, melting them back down would be destruction of currency, which is a felony, and if you cast them yourself (I assume we're talking about a coin that's not being minted anymore) that's forgery, which is an international felony if you're transporting it across a border.

If they're real coins and you don't fark with them, sure, that'd work.
 
2013-04-04 09:18:17 AM

Deathfrogg: About 25% of ALL Stock transactions in the United States is based on drug money alone.



Is that the real reason it "can't" be legalized?
 
2013-04-04 09:25:41 AM

mattharvest: MythDragon: Bucky Katt: FTFA: a currency detector dog

I had no idea there was such a thing.  Now I'm scared.

Just wait until you get hit up by the fruit beagle. I was coming back from Japan, and there was a military group who had come back from the same flight. We were waiting to pick up our bags so we could go clear customs and the fruit beagle starts sniffing this one guy's back (who is in full uniform, BTW) The agent makes him open his bag and finds an orange and loses his shiat. "Sir! This is an undeclared orange! You ARE NOT PERMITTED to bring fruit into this country! Did you not READ THE RULES??"

The guy tries to explain they gave him the orange on the damn plane and he was just saving it for later. The agent says "Sir, you are bringing OUT OF COUNTRY fruit INTO THE COUNTRY. You CANNOT do that!. You need to come with me now!"

The haul the guy off somewhere, and I didn't see him again by the time I had gotten my bags and cleared customs.

This is a good example of how if you looked up why a rule existed, you wouldn't be so indignant.

There are a large number of food-borne parasites and infectious organisms that can only cross the ocean by riding fruit.  It is virtually impossible to determine, without smashing and examining the fruit, whether any given fruit has many/most of these.  In order to protect each country's ecology, most (if not all) countries are extremely strict about these.

What's worse is that most countries have rather differing policies on what pesticides are permissible, what genetically modified foods are growable, etc., and so most countries cannot trust other countries to have policed their fruit according to the way the receiving nation wants.

For example, since 2011 many countries have been dealing with an infestation of the Khapra beetle, and so you cannot import dried rice without permission into the US.  This isn't because the government is necessarily worried about intentionally polluting our food supply, but rather that we're w ...


It was an orange he got on the Goddamn plane. He wasn't smuggling West Asian Carp Nugget Trees which might contain the invasive Red Ethiopian Limpet Weevil. That would make sense that you can't have those. It was food that was flown, by the airline, into the country already. They didn't make an announcement that "Any food given to you on this flight must be consumed before leaving". One would assume that food provided on the flight to the country you're going to would be allowed in the country you're going to.
 
2013-04-04 09:31:14 AM

mattharvest: Deathfrogg:


I am not a lawyer. I have no intention of ever becoming one. I'm a 48 year old college student jumping through a hoop in a PoliSci class on my way to a manufacturing engineering degree. I spent weeks trying to sift through Federal Statutes on the subject. Talk about obfuscation, Jesus.

Incidentally, I scored an A on the paper and a B in the class. These laws go way back to the British Crown and predate the US Constitution by over a century, and were a major factor in fostering the American Rebellion. But they were also among the first laws passed by Congress in the 1790s.

The laws are rather clear on the subject. There is no burden of proof required upon the States or the Federal Government required to prove the money was illegitimate. The proof is on the person who had their asset confiscated to prove it wasn't involved in a crime. These are not criminal laws, but civil. No suspicion of criminality is necessary.

Or are you forgetting the US Constitution?

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Civil Asset Forfeiture laws are not criminal statutes, they are Civil. These laws are being used to rob people all over the country.
 
2013-04-04 09:32:22 AM
I'm shocked and saddened by how many of you are ok with this.  It's seriously farked up that a government body can do this to it's people.  He wasn't even charged with a crime.  They just didn't like what he had to say so they took his money.  And all anyone had to say on the matter was, "Well, it was suspicious.  And he couldn't prove he wasn't going to break the law... so the money is ours now."

/Disgusting.
 
2013-04-04 09:34:34 AM

mattharvest: Here in Maryland, it's a trivial process: you serve a copy on the seizing agency and the State's Attorney's office, and you show up for your hearing.  The State then has the burden of showing why it should not be returned (by default, you get it back if you ask and in fact, much of the time the State simply declines to hold a hearing and agrees to the return).


Or you may have to get together with others who had their property confiscated, get the Department of Justice involved and with the support from the ACLU enter into a four year long legal battle...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Asset_forfeiture_controve rs y

Or enter into a three year long legal battle with the Feds...

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/15/feds-give-up-trying-to-seize-a-mot el -bas

Or spend four months trying to get back bail money the police instructed you to bring to the jail in cash...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/20/asset-forfeiture-wisconsin- ba il-confiscated_n_1522328.html

Note - given the cash amounts in most cases and the time required to fight the case it would not be worth attempting to get the money back unless you can get a lawyer to represent you pro-bono.
 
2013-04-04 09:35:57 AM

abhorrent1: I love how they can arbitrarily decide the money you have is proceeds of a crime and just take it. And why is it only $10k and over can be the result of a crime? Maybe he was going to a casino.


That's not how it worked.  It was the importation of more than $10 000 that was a crime.  Had he declared it, they might have investigated, but they couldn't just seize it.

Same with guns.  When the Canadian Border Guard asks if you have a firearm, say yes.  They'll take it, and for a fee, will hold it for you.  Don't declare it, and you're going to jail.
 
2013-04-04 09:36:44 AM

dyhchong: Except he was guilty and it was proven, he brought in more than $10,000 without declaring it. They didn't just look at the money and say it was over 10k, they calculated it to make sure.


And two days earlier it wasn`t over. They had to calculate it to find him slightly over.

Are you really saying that $9,999.99 is only ever carried by law abiding citizens and 10,000.01 is only ever carried by people who obtained the money by crime?

Are you really happy with saying that having over $10,000 itself is PROOF of criminal activity and so said monies should be confiscated?

You sound poor. And stupid. And an authoritarian conformer...
 
2013-04-04 09:37:55 AM
Does it really matter whether he was $20 under or $20 over? Does that really give them the right to STEAL it? They're the ones claiming it was being used in a crime, the burden of proof should be on them. farking disgusting. Remind me to never go to canada!
 
2013-04-04 09:39:55 AM
I'm going to have to go with:
Dumbass.  Even if you're telling the truth, you're making yourself look guilty.  You're a con that sells "mushrooms" that's deliberately skirting the law.  That's just asking for an asshole / hard nosed cop to come down on you.

Either declare the money or stay WELL below the limit.

Or better yet, get a money order or cashiers check.
 
2013-04-04 09:40:59 AM

MythDragon: One would assume that food provided on the flight to the country you're going to would be allowed in the country you're going to.


Who said they didn`t put it onto the plane in the same country meaning that it was NOT fruit brought from another country...
 
2013-04-04 09:43:19 AM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?


I bought a friend of mine a commemorative coin made of silver for his daughters birth and sent it to him, and declared the value of the coin as the face value. I paid more for it than face value, which is where the issues could come up, but according to law here I can walk into a store and buy something for 100kr with it.

Thinking about it, there are people who collect US bills with odd serial numbers. Example a 100 dollar bill with 000000001 or something can go for a lot of money. Lets say you bought one. How would you declare it?
 
2013-04-04 09:45:24 AM

The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: mattharvest: Here in Maryland, it's a trivial process: you serve a copy on the seizing agency and the State's Attorney's office, and you show up for your hearing.  The State then has the burden of showing why it should not be returned (by default, you get it back if you ask and in fact, much of the time the State simply declines to hold a hearing and agrees to the return).

Or you may have to get together with others who had their property confiscated, get the Department of Justice involved and with the support from the ACLU enter into a four year long legal battle...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Asset_forfeiture_controve rs y

Or enter into a three year long legal battle with the Feds...

http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/15/feds-give-up-trying-to-seize-a-mot el -bas

Or spend four months trying to get back bail money the police instructed you to bring to the jail in cash...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/20/asset-forfeiture-wisconsin- ba il-confiscated_n_1522328.html

Note - given the cash amounts in most cases and the time required to fight the case it would not be worth attempting to get the money back unless you can get a lawyer to represent you pro-bono.


TY Evil. The Motel one was one of the anecdotes I cited in the crappy little paper I wrote for class.

Say you have $1500.00 in cash, because you are going to buy a car. A cop pulls you over because your tail light was flickering as you turned a corner, and he asks you if you are carrying any cash. You tell him no, and refuse a search. The cop then brings in a dog to sniff around your car. The dog gives off some sort of positive response, and they find the cash. They arrest you for lying to a cop, and your money is taken.

Just having the money is considered probable cause to charge that money with a civil offense, especially if that money is contaminated with drug residue as is nearly every bill in circulation.

The Tehana case is especially egregious, as the cops admitted in open court that they had trained their dogs to respond to the handlers signals to give that positive response whether or not the dog had actually found anything.
 
2013-04-04 09:48:06 AM
Being legal is not a grey area especially in accounting. Either you have 9,999.99 or less or you don`t. You can`t have over AND under $10k. If he checked the exchange rate and allowed a margin of $120 then that should be ok.

Personally I think you should be able to check the exchange rate on the day you buy the flight or any day inbetween then and your flight and optionally use any of the exchange rates.
 
2013-04-04 09:48:16 AM

Deathfrogg: Say you have $1500.00 in cash, because you are going to buy a car. A cop pulls you over because your tail light was flickering as you turned a corner, and he asks you if you are carrying any cash. You tell him no, and refuse a search. The cop then brings in a dog to sniff around your car. The dog gives off some sort of positive response, and they find the cash. They arrest you for lying to a cop, and your money is taken.


A) Lying to a police officer to avoid prosecution is a crime in some jurisdictions, not all.  However, if you're in a jurisdiction where it's a crime then your whole argument is moot.

B) Absent other evidence of a crime, they don't have a right to simply hold you while they wait for drug dogs for more than a short while.

C) You're just erecting a strawman, since no one does this.  You're just assuming the existence of these stops.  They have nothing to do with cases like that Motel.
 
2013-04-04 09:48:55 AM

Moonlightfox: Does it really matter whether he was $20 under or $20 over? Does that really give them the right to STEAL it? They're the ones claiming it was being used in a crime, the burden of proof should be on them. farking disgusting. Remind me to never go to canada!


Yes, it does matter.  Feel free to stuff $9980.00 in your panties and walk right in.
10k, declare it, walk right in.
10k+1, don't declare it, get caught, you've committed a crime, and you lose the proceeds of that crime.

And it works exactly the same going in the other direction.

Yes, the threshold is arbitrary,   All thresholds are.  But they need to be set somewhere.
 
2013-04-04 09:49:32 AM

dready zim: Are you really happy with saying that having over $10,000 itself is PROOF of criminal activity and so said monies should be confiscated?


Once more: the crime is failing to declare the money, not having it itself.  If he'd declared it, they would have investigated it with him and he'd likely have been fine.  It was the decision to break the law and fail to declare that created any issue.
 
2013-04-04 09:50:11 AM

Deathfrogg: Say you have $1500.00 in cash, because you are going to buy a car. A cop pulls you over because your tail light was flickering as you turned a corner, and he asks you if you are carrying over $2000. You tell him no, and refuse a search. The cop then brings in a dog to sniff around your car. The dog gives off some sort of positive response, and they find the cash. They arrest you for lying to a cop, and your money is taken.


This is more like the story. Apples to apples.
 
2013-04-04 09:55:46 AM

mattharvest: B) Absent other evidence of a crime, they don't have a right to simply hold you while they wait for drug dogs for more than a short while.


And what are you going to do if they disagree?
 
2013-04-04 10:01:43 AM

mattharvest: Deathfrogg: Say you have $1500.00 in cash, because you are going to buy a car. A cop pulls you over because your tail light was flickering as you turned a corner, and he asks you if you are carrying any cash. You tell him no, and refuse a search. The cop then brings in a dog to sniff around your car. The dog gives off some sort of positive response, and they find the cash. They arrest you for lying to a cop, and your money is taken.

A) Lying to a police officer to avoid prosecution is a crime in some jurisdictions, not all.  However, if you're in a jurisdiction where it's a crime then your whole argument is moot.


A cop can assume you are lying, anytime he wants to. Even if he has to lie to do it. Cops lie all the time, even under oath. The lawyer I talked to during the course of setting up for this paper told me that cops are totally unreliable and untrustworthy as witnesses, as they lie, constantly, even when they don't need to.

B) Absent other evidence of a crime, they don't have a right to simply hold you while they wait for drug dogs for more than a short while.

Tell that to the poor slob who is being told they will have their kids taken and sent to foster homes of they don't sign away their rights to challenge the confiscation of the money, or who is being held on the side of a freeway for four hours while the cops go through every possible scenario as to why you are carrying cash money.

C) You're just erecting a strawman, since no one does this.  You're just assuming the existence of these stops.  They have nothing to do with cases like that Motel.

The stops happen every single day, in every State in the Union. They aren't after stopping the drug trade, they are after taking peoples money whether or not the money was illegally acquired. They don't care about anything but the money. In Tennessee, the cops park themselves in the southbound lanes of the freeway, and pull over anyone with out-of-state license plates or who have a skin color that indicates ancestry anywhere south of England, and take any money they can get, as I said, the threshold there is any amount over $100. If they were interested in actually stopping drug smuggling, they would park their cars watching the Northbound lanes.

When you have Police Officers making cash money off of their work, you will have cops doing anything they can to increase access to that money. It is institutionalized corruption.
 
2013-04-04 10:02:33 AM

MythDragon: It was an orange he got on the Goddamn plane. He wasn't smuggling West Asian Carp Nugget Trees which might contain the invasive Red Ethiopian Limpet Weevil. That would make sense that you can't have those. It was food that was flown, by the airline, into the country already. They didn't make an announcement that "Any food given to you on this flight must be consumed before leaving". One would assume that food provided on the flight to the country you're going to would be allowed in the country you're going to.


The customs form you fill out prior to landing asks about shiat like fresh fruit. It doesn't matter if you got it on the plane or not, you still need to either not bring it in to the country, or declare it on the customs form. It really isn't a difficult concept unless you're a complete moron. Whether it is stupid or not, in that circumstance, is irrelevant.

I swear some people just shouldn't ever cross international borders.

Honest Bender: I'm shocked and saddened by how many of you are ok with this.  It's seriously farked up that a government body can do this to it's people.  He wasn't even charged with a crime.  They just didn't like what he had to say so they took his money.  And all anyone had to say on the matter was, "Well, it was suspicious.  And he couldn't prove he wasn't going to break the law... so the money is ours now."

/Disgusting.


He broke a law... he took more than $10K in currency across the border without declaring it. He wasn't oblivious to the law as he tried very hard to get just below the limit, but he obviously didn't do a good enough job.
 
2013-04-04 10:04:15 AM

Teknowaffle: The Evil That Lies In The Hearts Of Men: Question:

Canada mints a 1oz gold coin with a face value of $50. If you need to transfer, say, $15000 over the border could you just take 10 Canadian gold coins and then point to the official total face value of $500 to show you're well below the limit?

Or are there laws that would foil my cunning plan?

I bought a friend of mine a commemorative coin made of silver for his daughters birth and sent it to him, and declared the value of the coin as the face value. I paid more for it than face value, which is where the issues could come up, but according to law here I can walk into a store and buy something for 100kr with it.

Thinking about it, there are people who collect US bills with odd serial numbers. Example a 100 dollar bill with 000000001 or something can go for a lot of money. Lets say you bought one. How would you declare it?


If it is legal tender the collector's value doesn't matter, just it's currency value. As for those Canadian Maple Leafs and other precious metal coins, they are minted with a legal tender face value, but their real value is in their weight and metal type, and were made to be a way to invest in precious metals. So when it comes to declaring bullion coins at the border, I don't really know how they would determine the value, by the face value or the current value of the metal.
 
2013-04-04 10:04:30 AM

Deathfrogg: I just did a shortish, half-ass paper on this for school. In Tennessee for example, the threshold is $100.

Thats right. $100. If you are carrying more than that in cash, and you get pulled over in one of their little speed traps or "color" traps, and you are carrying more than that, they take it. Alabama, it's $500.


Oh fark that.  Petition.
 
2013-04-04 10:07:38 AM

MadSkillz: Bucky Katt: FTFA: a currency detector dog

I had no idea there was such a thing.  Now I'm scared.

It just keeps walking away from me!

Side note: This guy taking just under the legal limit seems ... less than legit.


Yeah absolutely. I wouldn't call $9,999 "well below" like subby. I was ready to be outraged but the dude is definitely up to some shiat. Especially since he doesn't have any business records to back up his claims of its source.
 
2013-04-04 10:09:32 AM

dready zim: dyhchong: Except he was guilty and it was proven, he brought in more than $10,000 without declaring it. They didn't just look at the money and say it was over 10k, they calculated it to make sure.

And two days earlier it wasn`t over. They had to calculate it to find him slightly over.

Are you really saying that $9,999.99 is only ever carried by law abiding citizens and 10,000.01 is only ever carried by people who obtained the money by crime?

Are you really happy with saying that having over $10,000 itself is PROOF of criminal activity and so said monies should be confiscated?

You sound poor. And stupid. And an authoritarian conformer...


Smart rich people don't move cash across the border. They pay the minimal fees (minimal when compared to their assets and the money they are trying to move) and do so legally. Or, if they really need to take large amounts of cash across the border, they declare it.

Teknowaffle: Thinking about it, there are people who collect US bills with odd serial numbers. Example a 100 dollar bill with 000000001 or something can go for a lot of money. Lets say you bought one. How would you declare it?


I'm pretty sure you are always safe going with the face value of the currency.
 
2013-04-04 10:10:26 AM

Weaver95: MadSkillz: Bucky Katt: FTFA: a currency detector dog

I had no idea there was such a thing.  Now I'm scared.

It just keeps walking away from me!

Side note: This guy taking just under the legal limit seems ... less than legit.

I guess we are no longer innocent until proven guilty.  now we're guilty and are not permitted to prove our innocence.  I think I'll go wave my tiny flags now, and pretend I matter to the powers that rule our lives.


What are you talking about? He broke the rules and has gone to court a couple times and lost each time. It's nit like this happened out of the blue.
 
2013-04-04 10:14:45 AM

nmemkha: I love how the outrageous becomes the new normal.

"If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to worry about!"


Obama rules the universe, so your inquiry is now racist.

/seriously, guy is a money mule, probably for his cocaine dealer
//whoops, should have spreadsheet faster
 
2013-04-04 10:15:19 AM

Deathfrogg: The system is robbing you, and it's all legal. And yes, they WILL shoot you dead to confiscate your property through the Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws. They don't have to arrest you, they don't have to charge you with a crime at all. They charge your PROPERTY with suspicion of involvement, and you aren't allowed to even hire a lawyer to defend it.


Never forget and keep repeating the mantra, conservatives, that we live in a free country! Never forget and keep repeating the mantra, liberals, that giving government ever more power and money will result in a more fair and equitable society for the little guy!

/not really
//you're both delusional dumbasses
 
Displayed 50 of 152 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report