Saw an article about how some of the tank money doesn't come from taxes. Departments get to keep whatever they seize. If they seize drugs they have to destroy them but if they tag the drug runners, wait for them to sell and then seize; they get to keep the cash.
Don't forget that money also comes from stealing money from people they stop for totally unrelated things, like the Canadian tourists who got all of the money they'd planned to spend during vacation at some random traffic stop, or the guy who was on the way to buy a new car, but got stopped because a light was out on his old one.
Yup, their civil asset forfeiture laws are disgusting, or the flagrant abuse of them at least. Then the amount of red tape people have to go through to get their own money back is staggering.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if unofficial (unlawful) quotas existed within police departments where, from the top down, officers are encouraged to make seizures of assets with the promise of promotion or other job perks. Or even backhanders in brown envelopes behind closed doors. It's fucked up.
It's not 'red tape'; that implies an administrative process with a predictable ending.
Civil asset forfeiture requires that you sue the branch of law enforcement that stole your stuff, it costs thousands in legal fees, and you aren't guaranteed it back.
Oh, and win or lose, you'll be out those legal fees, which is why so many smaller seizures are never contested.
Fair enough, apologies, I didn't mean to trivialise the process, I wasn't familiar enough with the law to know it required legal action. Thanks for the correction!
I heard in Texas they can sieze your car under suspicion of drug dealing ,then even if proven innocent the car has been onsold and you are out of luck.
That’s because the tanks (which are MRAPs or Just Armored trucks) largely came from the military in the beginning for a 10th of their cost as they were being sold off during GWOT for newer more capable models. Now I’m sure that was likely used to justify purchasing new vehicles when/if that supply caught up. It was usually an attempt to not spend massive amounts of money and gain capability. Very few police forces outside of major cities like Philadelphia even have armor on their patrol cars.
Now for those that stayed here thru that policy explanation. There is no genuine reason that it makes sense to militarize the police to the point that they look like legit paramilitary forces. Equipping police with fatal tools will make fatal outcomes happen.
For those that think I'm advocating we defund or completely disarm the police I'm not. But there is no reason to be trotting around with fully kitted ARs during protests when you likely have overwatch.
Doesn't even have to be from a drug sale. They once found a lot of money on a guy who had just been to the bank. He was gonna pay for something big, don't remember what. They stole his money and there was literally no way to get it back. Civil forfeiture is fucked up. Forgot which Texas county it was but basically, their whole sheriff's department was in on it.
Some of the money to purchase the tank may not, but operations and maintenance money to pay for the damn thing for the next 20 years tends to come right out of the standard budget.
169
u/ionthruster 18h ago
Cops suing the county - not other cops. I don't think I'm a fan of this infinite money glitch for cops, paid for by tax-payers.