UPDATE: Oklahoma's use of card readers to freeze, seize funds comes under fire

Police in Oklahoma are using scanners that can identify phony credit cards, but critics warn the devices could also allow cops to empty the bank accounts of law-abiding citizens with one swipe. Authorities in the state are using the new devices during traffic stops to freeze and seize money loaded onto prepaid debit cards by alleged drug traffickers, with the potential to net up to $8,000 per portable scanner. Supporters of the program, which has only been in the field for about six weeks, say it's an important tool for law enforcement agencies to interrupt the flow of illegal drugs into Oklahoma.

The Oklahoma Department of Public Safety signed a contract with Texas-based ERAD Group Inc., to use the devices, which work on "open loop" prepaid debit cards, like those provided by American Express and Visa. But "debit cards attached to a valid checking account or valid credit cards cannot be processed" by ERAD, which stands for Electronic Recovery and Access to Data. The company that manufactures the devices is also promised 7.7 percent of all money forfeited using the machines, according to one contract obtained by Oklahoma Watch.

The card readers, which are said to be used in at least 25 other states, have reignited debate over civil asset forfeiture -- a legal tool used by police and prosecutors across the country to take millions of dollars in cash, cars, homes and more every year.

Under civil forfeiture, law enforcement can seize property without charging an individual with a crime. Unlike criminal forfeiture, no conviction is necessary to seize assets -- a law opponents say threatens basic rights to property and due process.

LINK


When I first reported this I thought ONLY Oklahoma was using this device but apparently 24 other states are also using this device! BUT good news it LOOKS like the local government officials are starting to voice their opinions and are against this type of seizure and I agree!

The current leftist also known as "fascist" government in rule right now are slowly loosing their control over the population. You can tell by the fear on Obama's face. Looks like their will be a new and better replacement in November.....


GO.......?






GO.......?

Under civil forfeiture, law enforcement can seize property without charging an individual with a crime. Unlike criminal forfeiture, no conviction is necessary to seize assets -- a law opponents say threatens basic rights to property and due process.

Laws like this make my blood boil. Barney Fife decides that your car is a little too nice, you know, the one you've saved for, for 20 years and claims you got it with drug money. He takes it and then you have to prove you're not guilty. What happened to "Innocent till proven guilty'? Profit boys and girls. Profit. Those cops are more worried about funding their dept and all their neat little toys, than they are about your Rights.

The civil forfeiture stuff really bothers me.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

The current leftist also known as "fascist" government in rule right now are slowly loosing their control over the population. You can tell by the fear on Obama's face. Looks like their will be a new and better replacement in November.....

Oklahoma has a Republican Governor and both chambers of the Oklahoma state legislature are controlled by the Republican Party (40-8 in the Senate and 71-30 in the House of Reps). So of course, you blame the left. (facepalm)

Also, these procedures are happening at the State level, not the federal level. So what does Pres Obama have to do with this?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

There are NO left people that would want this. You found a problem, backed by a conservative state with conservative government and tried to blame it on .....what?????

originally posted by: Elton
The civil forfeiture stuff really bothers me.

Same here.

Either convict someone with a crime or leave them be.

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Looks like their will be a new and better replacement in November.....

Who is that?

Last i checked your choice was between a narcissistic corrupt lier and a narcissistic lieing authoritarian.

Totally unconstitutional.

A person has the right to be secure in their papers and effects. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty FIRST in a court of law. There is due process to get a conviction, then the appeal process BEFORE injury can be inflicted by any government entity. Likewise the individual injured by the government entity engaging in such unconstitutional behavior has the right to sue the govt. for damages as well as compensation.

When folks ask how the law can be racist....this is an example.

I am a person who execute the payroll for several businesses, and I have some insight into banking practices due to this and the direct deposit policy we have (we do not prefer live checks, and issue a debit card from ADP for employees without checking accounts).

Banks are not a place that minorities tend to patronize. To target debit cards that are not tied to a bank is directly targeting the financial mobility of minorities. If you get right down to the textbook definition of fascism, this law is fascist.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

It gets even worse when you include the increased profiling against minorities which leads to a disproportionate number of stops, disproportionate number of arrests instead of warnings, etc. They do this because it's easier to pick on people who they suspect can't afford to fight back.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Drug dealers aren't very sympathetic, either.

And lord knows, you don't have many folks int he white collar crowd knowing any drug dealers and being able to sympathize with them.

Not that we should all feel sorry for the meth dealer that loses his mobile lab. But if in order to catch him we have to sweep up a dude raising a family with legit money deposited by his employer on a prepaid card....he'll be homeless, without utilities and his car reposessed before he's able to fight through the legal hurdles to get his money back. If he can or will. And I ain't cool with that.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I agree and subscribe to the idea of:

"Better 10 guilty men go free than 1 man be wrongly convicted"

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Civil asset forfeiture in this case is exactly highway robbery. I disagree with the entire concept for the obvious civil rights violation that it is. The fact that the court has not struck it down as unconstitutional indicates that judges are simply agents of state control and not fair balancers of the scales of justice they are paraded out to be. Civil asset forfeiture is in fact a punitive measure which puts it squarely under the judicial branch but that branch has not moved against the law even to protect its turf of meting out punishment. If the police can seize property without any due process required the system is broken down completely. There is no separation of powers any longer. It says the government is corrupted beyond repair and should be dissolved and reformed at once to better serve the people.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: DeathSlayer

There are NO left people that would want this. You found a problem, backed by a conservative state with conservative government and tried to blame it on .....what?????

DEMOCRATS are the ones most likely to try and control every aspect of our lives, period. Big Government = control.
As far a money and corruption, every level of government local to Federal, Republican and Democrat is absolutely corrupt.
Whoever put this in these States, was bought off.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Yep. And then there are the dealers who are known to law enforcement, but are allowed to continue as long as they act as informants. And then there are the dealers who are actually undercover agents, but are allowed to sell real substances in order to get closer to the criminal groups. I doubt these are the ones who get caught up in civil asset forfeitures situations.

Actually, that makes me think of something. I've seen a process we'd call "taxing", which involved corrupt cops allowing illegal actions as long as they received a cut (the "tax"). Usually, they'd "confiscate" drugs, phones, or cash, then let the people go. Sometimes they'd rough the person up first, while other times, everyone would just treat it like a normal cash transaction.

So I'm wondering if this debit card reader situation is also being used for this? Or to be blunt, I can imagine some police departments making deals where they "seize" funds from specific groups in exchange for allowing them to do business. I can especially see this happening with departments that have budget shortfalls or with corrupt rings within the departments.

I kinda wish they'd investigate individual departments to see if there's a steady stream of "seized" assets coming from affiliates of the same gangs or criminal rings. Like if 25% of their "seized" assets every month comes from the same 20-30 people, who all happen to be affiliated with the same crime ring. In essence, it would be money laundering if an agreement between the ring and the department could be proven.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
When folks ask how the law can be racist....this is an example.

I am a person who execute the payroll for several businesses, and I have some insight into banking practices due to this and the direct deposit policy we have (we do not prefer live checks, and issue a debit card from ADP for employees without checking accounts).

Banks are not a place that minorities tend to patronize. To target debit cards that are not tied to a bank is directly targeting the financial mobility of minorities. If you get right down to the textbook definition of fascism, this law is fascist.

I don't think they're doing it for racist reasons, those people simply share behavior with the targeted demographic. That doesn't excuse this behavior of course but banks for all their evils do have some purpose since they legitimize and somewhat protect your money.