Comments by "DynamicWorlds" (@dynamicworlds1) on "HUGE WIN Against Civil Asset Forfeiture" video.

  1. Along with everyone else who did the same and everyone who knew and covered for them. Enough with criminals in uniform.
    28
  2. Yup, forget protect and serve. They're not even law enforcement. They're just gangs.
    5
  3. What happened is we have a court system that simply doesn't care what the Constitution says on ANY issue. We're not citizens. We're subjects.
    5
  4. Supposed to be? A thin "maybe" Have ever been? A solid "no"
    2
  5. It's very simple: The court system simply doesn't care what the Constitution says on ANY issue. They believe the law is simply whatever they say it is (and are defacto, correct, unfortunately).
    2
  6. Yup. Getting to keep ANY of the money (directly or indirectly) is an OBVIOUS conflict of interest.
    2
  7. John Ehrlichman (Nixon’s chief domestic advisor) even admitted what it was really about, but we still pretend like the "War on Drugs" is different from prohibition. Unfortunately YouTube seems to not like me posting the quote, but you can find it easy if you search.
    2
  8. What "law enforcement"? I only see uniformed gangsters.
    2
  9. AND prison for any officers involved.
    2
  10. Police don't work in law enforcement. They don't even know or care what the law is. They're just members of gangs we've given badges to.
    1
  11. And everyone who's ever used it thrown in prison as the criminals they are. The Constitution is completely unambiguous on this, but the courts don't care what it says.
    1
  12. “You want to know what this was really all about? The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” -John Ehrlichman (Nixon’s chief domestic advisor)
    1
  13. Defacto: the law is whatever the court says, no matter if the Constitution or even other Supreme Court rulings say otherwise. We are not citizens. We're subjects.
    1
  14.  @PhysicsGamer  and when the highest courts in the land are all corrupted and don't care at all about either legal consistency or the Constitution, that's not just a "well that happens sometimes" kind of problem. Rulers rarely step down to let people self-govern peacefully and make no mistake, that's what we have: rulers, not representatives.
    1
  15. @PhysicsGamer  ah yes, so silly to acknowledge that systemic corruption exists. 🙄
    1
  16. @PhysicsGamer  nothing I said was remotely nihilistic. Learn what words mean.
    1
  17. @PhysicsGamer  never said that anywhere here or elsewhere. Go learn what words mean before you try and guess at things I haven't talked about. Btw, while you're looking up "nihilism" look up "bootlicker"
    1
  18. When the "good cops" cover for bad cops' illegal activities, there are no good cops.
    1
  19. Yeah, but we don't trust the cops to have ANY integrity, so keep as many cameras on them as possible.
    1