Imagine a young man, who is moving across the country to a new job. He closed out his bank account and took the sum of ten thousand dollars with him. The police pull him over for speeding, observe him behaving nervously and then search his car finding the ten thousand dollars. The police then take that money away from him, claiming that it is drug money, and inform him that HE MUST PROVE that it isn't drug money if he wants it back. If the police find traces of cocaine on the money, the young man may never see his cash again. (Considering that a significant percentage of large bills in circulation in America randomly tested have been found with traces of cocaine, this is not that hard to do.) Does this sound like some future police state, which monitors your every action? No, this is America in the year 2002.

Few Americans are aware that Federal laws, supposedly designed to fight the drug war, give the police the power to confiscate your money. You are presumed guilty, and the burden of proof to show that you are innocent of being involved in the drug trade is on you. According to a recent article (Ref. 1) "Federal law requires those carrying $10,000 cash or more to complete a currency transaction report detailing where the cash came from. Business people hold documents - deposit slips, withdrawal tickets and receipts - that prove the cash is legitimate and it belongs to them." So we are supposed to carry around proof that our money is our money. What happens if you don't follow this Federal law that most people know nothing about? "Otherwise, cash... is confiscated and turned over to the DEA." (Ref. 1) There is something terribly wrong when the DEA and local cops can "take" large amounts of cash from people without ever charging the person with anything at all.

This brings up a "little thing" called the Fourth Amendment. Recent graduates from American public schools may not have learned about this since so much time is devoted to diversity awareness, condom distributions and Holocaust studies. The Fourth Amendment is one of the ten rights that make up the "Bill of Rights" which constitute our basic freedoms as Americans. Naturally corrupt politicians and the Jewish media don't want you to know about these rights. A good example is the Second Amendment, which gives us the right to "keep and bear arms." The Jews and liberals have told us that this right only applies to the police and National Guard. Every dictatorship in the world gives its police and military the right to "keep and bear arms." A right of the people means a right that applies to ALL the citizens, not just the police and military (regardless of what dishonest Jews and liberals may claim). While the attack on the Second Amendment is always disguised as a "public safety" issue, the attack on the Fourth Amendment has been cloaked in the "good intentions" of the war on drugs.

The Fourth Amendment states: "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." Notice that it does not say that you must get a note from your bank to prove that a large amount of cash belongs to you.

The so-called "war on drugs" has opened the door for many un-Constitutional abuses of American citizens. There is no fairness in programs which permit the agency responsible for making arrests or enforcing law to keep the money they confiscate much like privateers (or pirates). I am not advocating drug use. I've never touched an illegal drug, nor would I, but it should be obvious to any thinking person that the corrupt government, we have these days, will use any excuse to destroy the freedoms which we once took for granted.

The police boast that people usually do not reclaim their money. No wonder, when it usually costs them more in court costs and attorney fees than what they'd get back. People need to protest these laws. There was an incident back in 1992 in California. (Ref. 2) The "war on drugs" permitted the confiscation of property whenever drugs were found on that property. Don Scott owned some mountain property in Ventura County, that the state of California wanted for a new park. He became the target of a drug raid.

The raid was based supposedly on a tip from an informant. Many people suspect that there never was any credible evidence that Scott had any drugs on his property and that the police raid was merely a "fishing expedition" in which police hoped to find drugs so that they could confiscate his property. As it turned out, Don Scott had no drugs on his property, but police shot him dead during the confusion of the raid as they stormed his house. When the police are given a law that enables them to steal someone's property if they find any drugs, that will lead to unnecessary raids designed simply to gain a big financial prize for their police department. If the Fourth Amendment were taken seriously, instead of being riddled with loopholes, Don Scott would be still be alive, and we would all be a lot safer in our own homes.

1).POLICE CAN KEEP MILLIONS IN CASH
http://www.charleston.net/pub/archive/news/sei0224.htm