Interesting Links for 17-01-2015

[andrewducker]

• Virgin Media's plans for IPV6 in 2015
  (tags: ipv6 virgin thefuture )
• Comments on the Debate over the Proposal to Redefine UTC
  (tags: time computers )
• BBC uses anti-terrorism laws to catch TV licence fee dodgers
  (tags: bbc terrorism OhForFucksSake )
• Back to the Future, Time Travel, and the Secret History of the 1980s
  (tags: movies history

Comments

[darkoshi]

I agree - I don't see anything in the article that says that you now have to be guilty of something to have property seized. It sounds like state and local police can continue to do so under state policies; only the federal program and its "sharing" provisions are being stopped. (Which at first confused me, because if the state now gets to keep 100% of the seized money rather than sharing it with federal agencies, how does that reduce the incentive for them to seize things?) But the article explains:

“Today, however, every state has either criminal or civil forfeiture laws, making the federal adoption process less necessary,” Holder’s statement said. “Indeed, adoptions currently constitute a very small slice of the federal asset forfeiture program. ”

Some police departments have shown an apparent preference for federal law over state laws. Equitable Sharing allowed many departments to make or benefit from seizures in ways they could not have under state law. The program required the seizure proceeds to go back to the departments, while some state asset forfeiture programs mandate that the money go into general funds.

[randomdreams]

I expect the latter part, of civil forfeiture going back into general funds, may get a lot of pressure to change -- but the legislators, at least, are going to want to keep that the way it is. Maybe this will actually help reduce the incentive.