Even if I agreed w/the war on drugs (& I do NOT), it's painfully obvious that local jurisdictions & states are abusing the hell out of asset forfeiture laws. People are being deprived of their possessions, even when not convicted of a crime.
So what if you have a son who lives at home and deals drugs out of the house. He then gives his parents cash from drug sales to pay the mortgage. Son gets busted and convicted. Should the parents be able to keep the ill gotten gains tied up in the house? What if someone steals a car and gives it to a friend? Should the police be able to take it back?
@@Josh.1234 Not quite apples to apples because a person selling their own drugs or being a middleman has "legal" possession of those drugs to sell them. Your next sentence talks about "stealing" a car that is not yours.
@@Josh.1234 At one point it was illegal for Rosa Parks to sit in an open seat at the front of the bus, so the question we should be asking, "Should it be illegal"? At one time it was illegal for me to own an AR-15 (so long as it had certain "cosmetic features").
@@UTubekookdetector whether something is illegal or not is a whole other can of worms. Of course there have been unjust laws but if we don't acknowledge the need for an enforced legal system, our country will fall into chaos.. more than it already has like in liberal jurisdictions. So whatever that list of illegal things are, they can open you up to have ill-gotten proceeds confiscated.. no one would argue drug dealers can keep their profits nor would you say it's ok for their family to keep those illegal proceeds he gave them. Pick whatever illegal proceeds you want, same principle applies.
Awesome finding this video. I tell everyone who'll listen about Sarah's article (including my Senators/Congressmen, letting them know anyone who supports CAF should be voted out). Americans are waking up, be it ever so slowly. The internet sped up this process, but it never feels fast enough. The sooner apathy and blind obedience is dead, the better.
The DA is still going for court cost etc. It is a SCAM against the good citizens of these United States of America. No way should the travesty of justice be allowed to continue. Sheriff of Nottingham is running a muck. ABOLISH CIVIL FORFEITURE !!!
Believe me, every person in the last 30 years or so who has had their assets stolen broods on this subject. It creates revolutionaries and distrust of law enforcement in general. People do not like the idea of being guilty until proven innocent. You start taking away their cars, homes and money and you are creating a monster.
They should have to prove in a court of law that the money you have is directly connected to an illegal activity. Just because the money tests positive for drugs doesn't mean a thing. If not they should not be allowed to take it. Also the bank reporting laws need to be reformed. They cause more problems than they purportedly fix.
@@thesnare100 Criminal proceeds Act. Make money from a crime, they keep the assets. They find £2000 in cash in your house and you have no wage slips are self employed paperwork to back it up. Lose your stuff. They raid a house with a warrant, find drugs or guns, kiss your stuff goodbye. If you have been pulled in a car? And have drugs it can lead to a search of your house...
On 2/20/2019 the FEDERAL SUPREME COURT voted 9 to 0 to end illegal forfeiture and seizure in the 8 and 14 amendments of the constitution also excessive fines were also stopped, this is binding on ALL STATES and MUNICIPALITIES.
Those specific acts were made unconstitutional precisely because they were the actions/methods used to control the American colonists (and the British laws they were fleeing from)--which brought about the American Revolution, because the British could take whatever they wanted--or use such threat of seizure to silence and control subjects. Excessive fines were one of the primary methods of control and intimidation. There are many effective laws to prosecute actual illegal drug activity, and more resources can be used to do more without unconstitutionally taking away the rights and resources of law-abiding citizens not convicted of a crime deserving such harsh punishment--if any. Government unlawfulness does not improve lawful behavior by citizens.
Prove a crime, prove the money is benefit from that crime, build a case, get a warrant, this civil forfeiture is lazy policing, and it’s cruel and unfair punishment.
Cash for kids, what a sick practice how do cops sleep at night. Just highwaymen with badges. At least Jesse James was honest about his armed robberies. He wasn’t cheeky and used his money to run for office or become a sheriff.
It should be totally obvious that this practice is absolutely ridiculous and in many cases amounts to ARMED ROBBERY! I understand the potential need and value to seize assets and certain property (namely vehicles) during certain investigations; but the actual forfeiture of the seized property must only occur after the conviction takes place. The laws need to be amended to guarantee that criminal charges be filed within a given (reasonable) amount of time (30 days should be more than sufficient, even 15-after all the stated purpose is to immobilize the suspects preventing them from disappearing until the charges can be filed). If no charges are filed the seized property must be returned; and if a conviction is not the result of the charges filed, then the property must be returned. And if a conviction is not made, then the state must also be held responsible for damages suffered by the victim! (if the police steal my car and I lose my job, apartment and personal belongings and yet I've committed no crimes, they must be accountable and help me restore my life & property AND lost wages!) It's as simple as that! They are using this law to ROB the public at gun-point! And this must be put to a stop. The law and the practice is allows have their place and can be enormously beneficial and don't need to be abolished-but they absolutely MUST be amended to include reasonable protections for the average citizen who is not a drug cartel leader!
Civil forfeiture is a criminal activity!. It is an evil that should be totally abolished. The cost of getting your property back is a lose due to Lawyer fees. And the cops don't even have to give you a receipt for property taken.
The only way that civil asset forfeiture should work is if a person or group of people lose those assets is if the defendant is tried on a rico statute and then is convicted , The police don't like to work hard that is why they get angry when you challenge them The prosecutors think writing a plea deal is hard which their job is to prove without a doubt of someone's guilt . WE have to protect our rights and we must start filing petitions to reverse this terrible law .
What about the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court just found everything about civil forfeiture unconstitutional in Timbs v. Indiana because it violated all of the principles that make excessive fines illegal? It has also been determined that states do NOT have the right to write ANY laws that violate the constitution? That should apply to HOA laws as well as civil forfeiture. Both sets of laws contain numerous Constitutional violations of civil liberty. They both need to be IMMEDIATELY abolished, unless abuse can be eliminated.
This is just blatant disregard by a government against it's own people. Not only has this bad behavior been rewarded, but encouraged by those who toady to power. America is not, nor should it ever be a dictatorship, and those who think it should be, should take their leave.
How about if we just follow the Constitution and due process? We should not be talking about where the money goes, we should be ending civil asset forfeiture
There also needs to be Laws passed that allow for a person's Vehicle to be Private Property and that they can not search someone's Vehicle without a prior consent and/or search Warrant to be issued, along with Law Enforcement Officials being Prohibited from Detaining the accused and/or suspected from being Detained while waiting for the approval from a Judge to issue a Search and Seizure Warrant. Because that is a direct Violation of the 4th Ammendment Right.
One thing you could do to make things change is Boycott Companies that Do business in States where this is a Big Problem like South Carolina (BMW has an assembly plant in SC), Texas, and Iowa to name a few
Policing for Profit would end if Asset Forfeiture required a criminal conviction and police departments would not be allowed to benefit from seized assets even if there was a criminal conviction.
If abolished, what happens to all the people who had their assets seized without being charged at the time? This is often the federal government's 1st move, seizes your assets so you have no resources to fight.
Hell NO putting it in Gen Funds --- they'll just allocate it right back to those districts who took it in the first place. No, either totally eliminate the law or require them to get a conviction - put the burdon of proof back on those who are taking the assets...like what the constitution is based on. Innocent until proven guilty ! Hell, in some states, like Tennessee, cops are running over each other fighting over who gets to shake down the motorist first !!! They don't even do that in Russia for Christ's sake.... And we call this the "land of the free" --- bull crap - what a farse !!! Get the bad guys --- what a line of bull. One look at the ratio of "bad guys" convicted to assets ceased is one hell of a huge ration. Its policing for profit pure and simple !!! Just the fact that there is next to no transparancy on this should be reason enough to eliminate it !!!! Hell, crooks do the same thing, they hide what they've stolen too - same as cops are doing !
When you give a person or a government bureau the licence to steal that is exactly what they will do! When did it become law that a person isn't allowed to have any cash on them? The amount is not important.
Civil Asset Forfeiture should be used against illegal aliens. Their ownership of property here in the US the result of their illegal presence in the US and is therefor subject to seizure and rightly so.
If I were king civil forfeiture would end right now. And I would go further - criminal forfeiture would be constrained to property derived directly from the criminal activity.
I would be for this if it took assets away from drug dealers, with some reforms, you must have a trial, if you can't pay high fines, you lose your assets. It's better than putting them in jail which COSTS the government and taxpayers money instead.
Violates the constitution and that cannot be argued, and I don’t care if the Supreme Court says it’s constitutional. It’s not and no reading of the law of the land could support or justify this theft. Violation of due process. Guilty until proven innocent. Cash cannot commit crimes, only people can, and money being involved in crime is not a civil infraction. My possession of cash in any amount is none of their business unless it’s involved in commission of a crime. It’d be regrettable for someone to do that to me.
I am personally in favor of civil and criminal forfeiture so long as two conditions for its use are also law: 1) Unless pursuant to a court judgment, a maximum of 70% of the value of any item can be seized so that the person or business always has some value remaining to provide for necessities in the immediate aftermath of a seizure; and 2) Should a court then find that the seizure was not followed by or related to a charge of serious criminal activity (i.e.,. the "probable cause" was likely bogus), the agency, department, or state which received the forfeited assets will be required to return them or their value to the owner immediately along with a penalty of 20 times their independently appraised value plus all court costs and attorneys fees charged to recover the property. Watch how disliked forfeiture law would suddenly be among law enforcement and other governmental agencies, and how careful and reserved they would suddenly be about using it. Incentives are everything in this type of conduct.
But most of these people have a job you don't have no business taking their money if they have a job and they saving their money that's their money not yours
I seemed to be being censored. Some of my posts seemed to have been removed. 1st Amendment violation. Analysis: Civil Asset Forfeit is fraud. Proof is fraudulent use of "property is the defendant" action while the owner is present. "Property is the defendant" action is used in cases where the owner is not available, deceased or outside US jurisdiction. It then forces the owner, standing in court to prove the property was not involved with a crime, when the government has failed to prove property was lawfully seized. Owner was never charged with a crime, but property was taken (stolen from owner). Civil Asset Forfeiture: property is seized and ... that's all it amounts to, which is theft. 5th Amendment Due Process, as in not an optional, in cases involving imprisonment, death penalty or seizing property - imprisonment without Due Process (abduction, held against one's well, no lawful reason) - tyranny and injustice, why it's Unconstitutional. - death penalty without Due Process - homicide by the government, why it's Unconstitutional - seizing of property without Due Process - theft by the government, why it's Unconstitutional Civil Asset Forfeiture - Fraudulently mislabels the property "the defendant" and skips out on "not an optional" process of law. Theft and fraud. And leads to Grand larceny, racketeering by government. Proponents tout how much money they've seized, but they can not claim it was from criminals, as they skipped out on Due Process. Having skipped out on proving property was lawfully seized, that is theft by the government. Those that have stolen the money also get to enjoy the proceeds like criminals. Easy test, have the government prove it was not stolen from owner. They can't, as they never charged the owner with a crime and didn't go through Due Process.
I am fairly sure they don't teach why Due (not an optional) Process is required by the Constitution. It's probable the judge won't know about it. You'll have to bring judges up to speed somehow.
The reason no one cares about this issue is because you don't fully explain both sides of the argument. There are valid scenarios where assets must be forfeited and this generic abolish makes no sense. You need to propose something works. If you gain assets from criminal activity even if you didn't commit the criminal activity, you are not allowed to keep those assets. Until someone explains how to handle these situations without civil asset forfeiture, I would never support abolishing it. This video doesn't even hint at addressing the valid reasons it's done. Bring a police officer, police chief or prosecutor on to actually rebut the one sides argument by the activist lawyer.
Abolish it. What difference does it make if the state collects the money or a local police force, its all a shakedown.
Even if I agreed w/the war on drugs (& I do NOT), it's painfully obvious that local jurisdictions & states are abusing the hell out of asset forfeiture laws. People are being deprived of their possessions, even when not convicted of a crime.
So what if you have a son who lives at home and deals drugs out of the house. He then gives his parents cash from drug sales to pay the mortgage. Son gets busted and convicted. Should the parents be able to keep the ill gotten gains tied up in the house?
What if someone steals a car and gives it to a friend? Should the police be able to take it back?
@@Josh.1234 Not quite apples to apples because a person selling their own drugs or being a middleman has "legal" possession of those drugs to sell them. Your next sentence talks about "stealing" a car that is not yours.
@@UTubekookdetector it's not about legal possession, it's about illegal activity. Selling drugs or stealing a car, both are felonies.
@@Josh.1234 At one point it was illegal for Rosa Parks to sit in an open seat at the front of the bus, so the question we should be asking, "Should it be illegal"? At one time it was illegal for me to own an AR-15 (so long as it had certain "cosmetic features").
@@UTubekookdetector whether something is illegal or not is a whole other can of worms. Of course there have been unjust laws but if we don't acknowledge the need for an enforced legal system, our country will fall into chaos.. more than it already has like in liberal jurisdictions.
So whatever that list of illegal things are, they can open you up to have ill-gotten proceeds confiscated.. no one would argue drug dealers can keep their profits nor would you say it's ok for their family to keep those illegal proceeds he gave them. Pick whatever illegal proceeds you want, same principle applies.
Awesome finding this video. I tell everyone who'll listen about Sarah's article (including my Senators/Congressmen, letting them know anyone who supports CAF should be voted out). Americans are waking up, be it ever so slowly. The internet sped up this process, but it never feels fast enough. The sooner apathy and blind obedience is dead, the better.
The DA is still going for court cost etc.
It is a SCAM against the good citizens of these United States of America.
No way should the travesty of justice be allowed to continue.
Sheriff of Nottingham is running a muck.
ABOLISH CIVIL FORFEITURE !!!
These thefts should be dealt with by deadly force. They just haven’t stolen from the right person yet.
Right on ! Keep the cops and the DA on the list !
They almost did....
When the Feds come to seize your assets, they come in force with local police deputized to assist. It's a no win situation. Been through it.
Believe me, every person in the last 30 years or so who has had their assets stolen broods on this subject. It creates revolutionaries and distrust of law enforcement in general. People do not like the idea of being guilty until proven innocent. You start taking away their cars, homes and money and you are creating a monster.
With these people whos lives they have destroyed, and stolen everything they are creating the very American army they may have to fight.
How can so-called free Americans put up with such a PERVERSE practice?
IT WAS FORCED ON US BY THE DEM-O-RATS .. MAFIA STYLE
Quite honestly,if i ever get framed and you try to steal my home, i will burn it to the ground.
jamie stewart I think I have to agree
They should have to prove in a court of law that the money you have is directly connected to an illegal activity. Just because the money tests positive for drugs doesn't mean a thing. If not they should not be allowed to take it. Also the bank reporting laws need to be reformed. They cause more problems than they purportedly fix.
Then they will collect on the insurance company and you go to jail for ARSON, only making your problems worst.
This is why I only leave a few hundred pounds in the bank. I don’t trust banks or government or police.
you said pounds, not sure how it is the UK. Does it exist there as well?
@@thesnare100
Criminal proceeds Act.
Make money from a crime, they keep the assets.
They find £2000 in cash in your house and you have no wage slips are self employed paperwork to back it up.
Lose your stuff.
They raid a house with a warrant, find drugs or guns, kiss your stuff goodbye.
If you have been pulled in a car? And have drugs it can lead to a search of your house...
civil forfeiture is a monster that needs to be fed more and more.
On 2/20/2019 the FEDERAL SUPREME COURT voted 9 to 0 to end illegal forfeiture and seizure in the 8 and 14 amendments of the constitution also excessive fines were also stopped, this is binding on ALL STATES and MUNICIPALITIES.
Those specific acts were made unconstitutional precisely because they were the actions/methods used to control the American colonists (and the British laws they were fleeing from)--which brought about the American Revolution, because the British could take whatever they wanted--or use such threat of seizure to silence and control subjects. Excessive fines were one of the primary methods of control and intimidation. There are many effective laws to prosecute actual illegal drug activity, and more resources can be used to do more without unconstitutionally taking away the rights and resources of law-abiding citizens not convicted of a crime deserving such harsh punishment--if any. Government unlawfulness does not improve lawful behavior by citizens.
Prove a crime, prove the money is benefit from that crime, build a case, get a warrant, this civil forfeiture is lazy policing, and it’s cruel and unfair punishment.
Cash for kids, what a sick practice how do cops sleep at night.
Just highwaymen with badges.
At least Jesse James was honest about his armed robberies. He wasn’t cheeky and used his money to run for office or become a sheriff.
It should be totally obvious that this practice is absolutely ridiculous and in many cases amounts to ARMED ROBBERY!
I understand the potential need and value to seize assets and certain property (namely vehicles) during certain investigations; but the actual forfeiture of the seized property must only occur after the conviction takes place.
The laws need to be amended to guarantee that criminal charges be filed within a given (reasonable) amount of time (30 days should be more than sufficient, even 15-after all the stated purpose is to immobilize the suspects preventing them from disappearing until the charges can be filed). If no charges are filed the seized property must be returned; and if a conviction is not the result of the charges filed, then the property must be returned. And if a conviction is not made, then the state must also be held responsible for damages suffered by the victim! (if the police steal my car and I lose my job, apartment and personal belongings and yet I've committed no crimes, they must be accountable and help me restore my life & property AND lost wages!)
It's as simple as that!
They are using this law to ROB the public at gun-point! And this must be put to a stop. The law and the practice is allows have their place and can be enormously beneficial and don't need to be abolished-but they absolutely MUST be amended to include reasonable protections for the average citizen who is not a drug cartel leader!
That would be "Criminal Asset Forfeiture" vs "Civil Asset Forfeiture".
Maybe some of the individuals (police and administrators) should be doxed and publicly called out / humiliated.
Civil forfeiture is a criminal activity!. It is an evil that should be totally abolished. The cost of getting your property back is a lose due to Lawyer fees. And the cops don't even have to give you a receipt for property taken.
The only way that civil asset forfeiture should work is if a person or group of people lose those assets is if the defendant is tried on a rico statute and then is convicted , The police don't like to work hard that is why they get angry when you challenge them The prosecutors think writing a plea deal is hard which their job is to prove without a doubt of someone's guilt . WE have to protect our rights and we must start filing petitions to reverse this terrible law .
What about the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court just found everything about civil forfeiture unconstitutional in Timbs v. Indiana because it violated all of the principles that make excessive fines illegal? It has also been determined that states do NOT have the right to write ANY laws that violate the constitution? That should apply to HOA laws as well as civil forfeiture. Both sets of laws contain numerous Constitutional violations of civil liberty. They both need to be IMMEDIATELY abolished, unless abuse can be eliminated.
How can criminals pretend to be involved in law enforcement?
Apply for a job at your local police department!!!!
this whole civil asset forfeiture business makes me wnt to move to Brazil...
This is just blatant disregard by a government against it's own people. Not only has this bad behavior been rewarded, but encouraged by those who toady to power. America is not, nor should it ever be a dictatorship, and those who think it should be, should take their leave.
finally they are talking with commonsense. thank you mr. bullock.
Ban Civil Asset Forfeiture and return all stolen funds.
Why don't we just simply call it what it is, civil asset theft.
How about if we just follow the Constitution and due process? We should not be talking about where the money goes, we should be ending civil asset forfeiture
That's a lawsuit
The law then is arbitrary? They can say and do whatever they want?
There also needs to be Laws passed that allow for a person's Vehicle to be Private Property and that they can not search someone's Vehicle without a prior consent and/or search Warrant to be issued, along with Law Enforcement Officials being Prohibited from Detaining the accused and/or suspected from being Detained while waiting for the approval from a Judge to issue a Search and Seizure Warrant. Because that is a direct Violation of the 4th Ammendment Right.
One thing you could do to make things change is Boycott Companies that Do business in States where this is a Big Problem like South Carolina (BMW has an assembly plant in SC), Texas, and Iowa to name a few
Thats crazy.
Policing for Profit would end if Asset Forfeiture required a criminal conviction and police departments would not be allowed to benefit from seized assets even if there was a criminal conviction.
If abolished, what happens to all the people who had their assets seized without being charged at the time? This is often the federal government's 1st move, seizes your assets so you have no resources to fight.
If they take my money. I will find a way to take there money.
End this..
Hell NO putting it in Gen Funds --- they'll just allocate it right back to those districts who took it in the first place.
No, either totally eliminate the law or require them to get a conviction - put the burdon of proof back on those who are taking the assets...like what the constitution is based on. Innocent until proven guilty ! Hell, in some states, like Tennessee, cops are running over each other fighting over who gets to shake down the motorist first !!! They don't even do that in Russia for Christ's sake....
And we call this the "land of the free" --- bull crap - what a farse !!!
Get the bad guys --- what a line of bull. One look at the ratio of "bad guys" convicted to assets ceased is one hell of a huge ration. Its policing for profit pure and simple !!!
Just the fact that there is next to no transparancy on this should be reason enough to eliminate it !!!! Hell, crooks do the same thing, they hide what they've stolen too - same as cops are doing !
Government for the people and By the people!! HA Government unto them selves!! Wake up America!!
Dirt naps will get there attention
its a very powerful badge. it allows you to steal and to kill
How bout establish guilt before you steal OPM.
Right on brother and while you’re at it end qualified immunity 👍
So what your saying is , it's okay for the police to steal money and property and not charge anyone of a crime ? That is wrong in a very bad way .
When you give a person or a government bureau the licence to steal that is exactly what they will do! When did it become law that a person isn't allowed to have any cash on them? The amount is not important.
Abolish it!
And I don't suppose any individual cops or prosecutors personally benefit from this?
Vote the politicians out of office and elect people who will stop this.
It is constitutionally illegal. If it is money they need make the necessary cuts to stay afloat.
Civil Asset Forfeiture should be used against illegal aliens. Their ownership of property here in the US the result of their illegal presence in the US and is therefor subject to seizure and rightly so.
Only if they are CONVICTED in a court of law of the CRIME of entering illegally, and sentenced to a PRISON TERM before being deported.
If I were king civil forfeiture would end right now. And I would go further - criminal forfeiture would be constrained to property derived directly from the criminal activity.
I would be for this if it took assets away from drug dealers, with some reforms, you must have a trial, if you can't pay high fines, you lose your assets. It's better than putting them in jail which COSTS the government and taxpayers money instead.
Please come and take my kids.!!!! You can have them. Please take them !!!
You can give them up for adoption and/or seek counseling.
Who the biggest gang in the city?
Violates the constitution and that cannot be argued, and I don’t care if the Supreme Court says it’s constitutional. It’s not and no reading of the law of the land could support or justify this theft. Violation of due process. Guilty until proven innocent. Cash cannot commit crimes, only people can, and money being involved in crime is not a civil infraction. My possession of cash in any amount is none of their business unless it’s involved in commission of a crime. It’d be regrettable for someone to do that to me.
₿uy ₿itcoin, bye banks.
I am personally in favor of civil and criminal forfeiture so long as two conditions for its use are also law: 1) Unless pursuant to a court judgment, a maximum of 70% of the value of any item can be seized so that the person or business always has some value remaining to provide for necessities in the immediate aftermath of a seizure; and 2) Should a court then find that the seizure was not followed by or related to a charge of serious criminal activity (i.e.,. the "probable cause" was likely bogus), the agency, department, or state which received the forfeited assets will be required to return them or their value to the owner immediately along with a penalty of 20 times their independently appraised value plus all court costs and attorneys fees charged to recover the property. Watch how disliked forfeiture law would suddenly be among law enforcement and other governmental agencies, and how careful and reserved they would suddenly be about using it. Incentives are everything in this type of conduct.
Reflected Miles this is not just for people buying stuff w illegal money that's wrong
blue crime
But most of these people have a job you don't have no business taking their money if they have a job and they saving their money that's their money not yours
So if they're unemployed take their money?
Still believe in the LIE that this is the land of the free and the home of the brave
I seemed to be being censored. Some of my posts seemed to have been removed. 1st Amendment violation.
Analysis: Civil Asset Forfeit is fraud. Proof is fraudulent use of "property is the defendant" action while the owner is present. "Property is the defendant" action is used in cases where the owner is not available, deceased or outside US jurisdiction.
It then forces the owner, standing in court to prove the property was not involved with a crime, when the government has failed to prove property was lawfully seized. Owner was never charged with a crime, but property was taken (stolen from owner).
Civil Asset Forfeiture: property is seized and ... that's all it amounts to, which is theft.
5th Amendment Due Process, as in not an optional, in cases involving imprisonment, death penalty or seizing property
- imprisonment without Due Process (abduction, held against one's well, no lawful reason) - tyranny and injustice, why it's Unconstitutional.
- death penalty without Due Process - homicide by the government, why it's Unconstitutional
- seizing of property without Due Process - theft by the government, why it's Unconstitutional
Civil Asset Forfeiture - Fraudulently mislabels the property "the defendant" and skips out on "not an optional" process of law. Theft and fraud. And leads to Grand larceny, racketeering by government.
Proponents tout how much money they've seized, but they can not claim it was from criminals, as they skipped out on Due Process. Having skipped out on proving property was lawfully seized, that is theft by the government. Those that have stolen the money also get to enjoy the proceeds like criminals. Easy test, have the government prove it was not stolen from owner. They can't, as they never charged the owner with a crime and didn't go through Due Process.
I am fairly sure they don't teach why Due (not an optional) Process is required by the Constitution. It's probable the judge won't know about it. You'll have to bring judges up to speed somehow.
The reason no one cares about this issue is because you don't fully explain both sides of the argument. There are valid scenarios where assets must be forfeited and this generic abolish makes no sense. You need to propose something works.
If you gain assets from criminal activity even if you didn't commit the criminal activity, you are not allowed to keep those assets. Until someone explains how to handle these situations without civil asset forfeiture, I would never support abolishing it. This video doesn't even hint at addressing the valid reasons it's done.
Bring a police officer, police chief or prosecutor on to actually rebut the one sides argument by the activist lawyer.
What the fuck happened to the 4th amendment.
Put all your trust in Christ Jesus and Jesus alone because the world will only give you sorrow and trouble.