Photo by Jon Wajte, Mustang Times
Canadian County Sheriff Randall Edwards says an attempt to stop the seizure of personal property by law enforcement even though the property’s owner is not charged with a crime is counterproductive and “asinine.”
In an email, Edwards attacks Senator Kyle Loveless and the reform bill he has introduced, the “Personal Asset Protection Act,” that will be studied in the interim.
Edwards claims drug interdiction programs will collapse if the bill becomes law.
Wrote Edwards in defense of the highly-criticized practice of civil asset forfeiture:
“Senator Kyle Loveless has authored a bill that will deregulate drug cartel traffic throughout our state. The bill takes all the drug monies and proceeds from asset forfeitures away from local law enforcement, who make the majority of the seizures, and gives it to the state.
“This is without a doubt the single worst, most damning, most asinine and devastating bill I have ever seen for this State and local law enforcement. This bill, if passed, will set the war on drugs back twenty years and will literally shut down the drug interdiction in this state, allowing drug traffic to run with 10 to 15 percent regulation, compared to the total state and local drug interdiction units now working interdiction in the state.
“Although the bill allows the state to continue to keep its share of the funds, it forces the local agencies to turn over its proceeds to the state. Local agencies will no longer be able to afford to work drug interdiction as a result of this bill.
“The State has not paid a penny of my Drug Interdiction program, I don’t know why they or anyone else in their right mind would think the state would be entitled to my agencies (sic) proceeds from it. The proceeds Kyle Loveless is proposing to take fund close to half of my cash funds, funds that support all my public safety programs, ranging from investigating on-line child sexual predators, to supporting nine K-9 Units and four full time drug interdiction units. These drug funds also account for a large part of my agency’s equipment, cars, radars, cameras and a multitude of other public safety equipment that Sheriffs will no longer will be able to buy, as well as jobs paid for and funded through these cash funds.
“Words can’t adequately express how this bill poses a serious and imminent threat to public safety and most directly the war on drugs in this state and nation. It’s completely asinine.”
Sincerely,
Randall R. Edwards, Sheriff
Canadian County Sheriff’s Office
Let me be sure I understand this. It is the good Sheriff’s opinion that the right of a free people to object to the confiscation of their assets based on the laws opinion of the use and nature of assets is asinine. Just wanted to be sure. It might be simplified if we turn in all our assets and let the government and law enforcement give us back what we need to eat and sleep. That might cut down on over eating and sleeping too much. Sounds like utopia to me.
This guy is a nightmare. The purpose of a Sheriff is to protect the rights of those in his county from infringement, not steal things from people without a conviction. Words cannot express how horrendous it is to have idiots such as this carrying a badge and a gun. He should be voted out of office for failing to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Thank God I don’t live, work, or travel through Canadian County – not that it is much better in other ones.
Sounds like there’s a new Sheriff in town and the old Sheriff don’t like it. No sir, he don’t like it one bit!
I guess the Old Sheriff doesn’t much care for the belief held by Thomas Jefferson when it came to crime and punishment. It is better that 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man lose his freedom and liberty.
The Sheriff says he needs to take funds from the Cartel, and if that was the only people he took from that would be the real purpose of the Forfeiture program….BUT! Judging from the phone calls I have gotten over the last 25 years, I would propose that only 10% of the people they take from are in that category!
Call Senator Loveless and give him a big thumbs up for tackling this EVIL! His office number is 405-521-5618 and get signed up to be notified when the Interim study gets underway.
Does the bill ONLY end confiscation of property from non-convicted persons?
It sounds like the part of the bill he is objecting to, would require those funds which are legally and properly confiscated per the rest of the bill, to be turned over the the state. He may not like the fact that the bill would also take away proceeds from an innocent dad with a drug addicted son, but I don’t see that addressed in the letter.
You are correct; he is opposed to proceeds going to the state instead of him.
I’ve always thought that confiscating money without finding him guilty of a crime was a violation of due process. Shifting the direction the money goes from the sheriff to the state doesn’t help that a bit.
But requiring conviction, as this bill does, would.
Civil Asset Forfeiture laws are equivalent to a letter of marque and have allowed our cops to become modern day privateers operating against there own countrymen. Land of the free and home of the brave……not so sure anymore.
Do any of you commenters actually know what the proposed law includes? Does it change the process of confiscation or the distribution seized assets?
Randall seems to not be worried about the process – just the distribution. I guess we are to assume his actions are always totally above board, and no innocent private citizens are ever screwed by his actions.
But, be aware, election times are always just around the corner, and us voters are watching this thing. Be advised to always do the right thing – not the most profitable thing.
LE will still be able to seize anything they want. They would just have to put it all in the general fund (state) instead of their own revolving funds if this passed. Also, a conviction is required for the state to keep the funds.
I have put in bold face the most important part of this reform, Watchit.
Agreed mikes1voice.