Homestead mailing list

[bobf <bobford79 AT yahoo.com>]

Governmental use of civil forfeiture is one of the scariest arrows in the 
governmenbt's quiver.  With CF, nothing is safe, 'piss them off, they can 
find a reaon to seize your home, your land, your autombiles, your bank 
accounts;

 And, in CF, you are presumed "guilty".  You have to go to court, and hire a 
big enough lawyer to go up against the full resources of the federal gov't. 
Almost anyone can accidentally break a myriad of laws today that they have no 
idea even exists.  Try picking up a dead eagle by the side of the road and 
see what happens.

 Along, with Waco and Ruby Ridge, Civil Asset Forfeirure is one of the 
primary reasons, I started to look very differently at the government of my 
country.  If I were 21, there are other places in the world that might sound 
pretty good to me right now.

  Once you settle down, in this country, you better 'play pretty' or frackin' 
drones or clowns from the government can threaten you with not just taking 
your freedom but taking everything you and your family owns.  

And, it happens far more often than people realize.  Don's 'bedouin' 
lifestyle of moving around from time to time sounds smarter and smarter to 
me.  I like the word 'vagabond', but it has other  not-so-good connotations 
for some people.  People say the government is necessary evil -- that doesn't 
stop it from being eveil.

Thanks for posting that ,Lynda. that reminds me to take my blood pressure 
medication (and others) that I forgot to take this am ;-)

---------------------------------------------------------------------


--- On Sat, 2/28/09, Lynda <lurine AT com-pair.net> wrote:

> From: Lynda <lurine AT com-pair.net>
> Subject: [Homestead] Here's One You Missed, Bob <g>
> To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Date: Saturday, February 28, 2009, 10:53 AM
> Nationalizing the cars and bikes of rock collectors -
> Pending Omnibus
> land bill's forfeiture provision has broad reach
> http://www.openmarket.org/2009/02/22/nationalizing-the-cars-and-bikes-of-rock-co\
> llectors-pending-omnibus-land-bills-forfeiture-provision-has-broad-reach/
> 
> "At the same time there has been so much talk of
> government
> nationalization of troubled big banks, a bill quickly
> snaking through
> Congress would allow the feds to expropriate cars, bicycles
> and other
> "vehicles and equipment" of everyone from amateur
> collectors of rocks to
> kids going on scavenger hunts.
> 
> In the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009, which
> passed the
> Senate (S. 22) in January and is up for a vote in the House
> as early as
> this Wednesday, a "forfeiture" provision would
> let the government
> confiscate "all vehicles and equipment of any
> person" who disturbs a
> rock or a bone from federal land that meets the bill's
> broad definition
> of "paleontological resource." The seizures could
> take place even before
> a person and even if the person didn't know they were
> taking or digging
> up a "paleontological resource." And the bill
> specifically allows the
> "transfer of seized resources" to "federal
> or non-federal" institutions,
> giving the government and some private actors great
> incentive to egg on
> the takings.
> 
> Groups representing those from scientists to rock
> collectors to other
> fossil enthusiasts have warned of ominous consequences that
> could
> criminalize the exploration and learning about natural
> history
> ironically in the name of protecting nature. According to
> Tracie
> Bennitt, president of the Association of Applied
> Paleontological
> Sciences, the bill's language is so vague and the
> penalties such as
> forfeiture so severe that it could allow the government to
> "put
> scientists in jail and confiscate university vans." In
> a letter on the
> bill to members of Congress, Bennitt warns, "We can
> visualize now a
> group of students unknowingly crossing over an invisible
> line and ending
> up handcuffed and prosecuted."
> 
> The area of concern is Subtitle D of the bill called the
> "Paleontological Resources Preservation Act." The
> provisions in this
> subtitle make it illegal to "excavate, remove, damage,
> or otherwise
> alter or deface or attempt to excavate, remove, damage, or
> otherwise
> alter or deface any paleontological resources located on
> Federal land"
> without special permission from the government.
> 
> A "paleontological resource" is broadly defined
> in the bill as "any
> fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of organisms,
> preserved in or on
> the earth's crust, that are of paleontological interest
> and that provide
> information about the history of life on earth."
> Penalities for
> violations include up to five years in jail, and, as
> previously stated,
> all vehicles and equipment "used in connection with
> the violation" are
> subject even before trial "to civil forfeiture, or
> upon conviction, to
> criminal forfeiture."
> 
> Among the problems, critics explain, is that the language
> is so broad
> that merely picking up rocks under this bill could be found
> guilty of
> "excavating" or "removing" a
> "paleontological resource." There are
> numerous rocks, stones, and other objects of nature that
> contain
> fossilized imprints and, in the bill's language,
> "are of paleontological
> interest and that provide information about the history of
> life on
> earth." In fact, it is likely the most rocks that
> people pick up would
> meet this definition.
> 
> So people from mining companies to amateur geologists known
> as
> "rockhounds" to children gathering stones on
> field trips could be at
> risk for unintentionally violating this bill should it
> become law. The
> law does purport to allow an exception for a
> "resonable amount" of
> "casual collecting," but then practically negates
> that excepion by
> saying that the "reasonable amount" shall be
> enitirely "determined by
> the Secretary" of Interior or Agriculture."
> 
> In an analysis of a similar bill in previous session of
> Congress, the
> policy group Partnership for America noted this scenario,
> "If a person
> were to be out hiking and picked up a rock as a souvenir,
> an enforcement
> officer who discovers this situation, at his or her
> discretion, could
> seize the equipment and the vehicle in use by the person or
> family at
> the time of the 'offense.'" The analysis
> concluded, "The legislation may
> sound benign on its surface, yet it could have very dire
> unintended
> consequences for mining companies, rock hounds (geology
> enthusiasts) and
> average citizens who enjoy our national forests."
> 
> One of those consequences is the civil forfeiture provision
> in Section
> 6308, which would leave those accused without their cars or
> other
> property until the trial was completed - basically the
> property would be
> guilty until proven innocent. As described by the
> Partnership for
> America analysis: "Even if a person eventually
> prevails in their case
> should they be prosecuted under this Act, their family
> would be without
> the use of the equipment and vehicle until the case is
> adjudicated,
> which could be months or even years, creating an extreme
> hardship in
> many cases. The government would likely try to obtain a
> guilty plea in
> exchange for a reduced penalty or the return of some of the
> personal
> property, which many innocent citizens would accept to
> avoid the cost
> and inconvenience of a trial." 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Homestead list and subscription:
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead
> Change your homestead list member options:
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/options/homestead/bobford79%40yahoo.com
> View the archives at:
> https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead