The woman who actually lives in the house had just moved to Oklahoma City from Maryland with her family about two weeks earlier.

“I keep asking them, ‘who are you? What are you doing here? What’s happening,’” she said. “And they said, ‘we have a warrant for the house, a search warrant.’”

She said they ordered her and her daughters outside into the rain before they could even put on clothes.

“They wanted me to change in front of all of them, in between all of them,” she said. “My husband has not even seen my daughter in her undergarments—her own dad, because it’s respectful. You have her out there, a minor, in her underwear.”

Marisa said the names on the search warrant were not hers or anyone in her family.

“We just moved here from Maryland,” she said. “We’re citizens. That’s what I kept saying. We’re citizens.”

She said the agents didn’t care.

“They were very dismissive, very rough, very careless,” she said. “I kept pleading. I kept telling them we weren’t criminals. They were treating us like criminals. We were here by ourselves. We didn’t do anything.”

Marisa said the agents tore apart every square inch of the house and what few belongings they had, seizing their phones, laptops and their life savings in cash as “evidence.”

“I told them before they left, I said you took my phone. We have no money. I just moved here,” she said. “I have to feed my children. I’m going to need gas money. I need to be able to get around. Like, how do you just leave me like this? Like an abandoned dog.”

Before they left, Marisa said one of the agents made a comment.

“One of them said, ‘I know it was a little rough this morning,’” she said. “It was so denigrating. That you do all of this to a family, to women, your fellow citizens. And it was a little rough? You literally traumatized me and my daughters for life. We’re going to have to go get help or get over this somehow.”

Now, Marisa said they have, quite literally, nothing.

“I said, ‘when are we going to get our stuff back?’ They said it could be days or it could be months,” she said.

Marisa said she is left with nothing but questions.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
55 points

We decided we needed to be able to shut down drug dealers by seizing their money without need for any real proof. Since then the majority of seizures, 84%, are civil most incidental to purposeless searches that turn up no crime. Many seizures are in fact under $1000 and most are under $2000. In theory you can get your money back but it often would cost thousands so for most victims its impossible to actually get money back without spending more.

Basically for decades the authorities have been acting as robbers and have collectively stolen billions from the people directly often stopping minorities for driving while black and treating the $400 in random bob’s wallet as proceeds of an imaginary crime they don’t need to substantiate. Being black and having $400 is enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Who is “we”? Please leave me out of this cult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_religion

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

We decided we needed to be able to shut down drug dealers by seizing their money without need for any real proof.

This is why it was so important to declare a “War on Drugs.” Most people thought it was just political rhetoric, but it was far more than that. By declaring a literal WAR on drugs, it offers the government an array of options that aren’t available in peacetime. One of those being the ability to alter the way suspects/combatants and their possessions/ weapons are treated. Money and valuables can be treated as a tool of drug dealing, and confiscated as spoils of war.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The war on drugs has only ever been rhetoric. It never literally gave anyone any additional powers because it is not in any way shape or form a declared war and has no legal meanings other than the ones you have completely fabricated in your alternate history.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Youre really misunderstanding what declaring an actual war is or is not. Technically the US has not been in an actual declared war since WWII.

The Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Iraq wars, none of those were declared as actual war by congress. The war on drugs is just political rhetoric and has no actual legal bearing.

You cant declare formal war on drug use because drug use isnt a recognized sovereign country

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You’re misunderstanding that you don’t need to declare an actual war to use wartime emergency powers. At any given time there are dozens of official federal emergencies, some of which have been in place for decades, allowing the White House to claim emergency powers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Youre argument makes no sense, and is contradicted in each sentence.

The Vietnam War, the Korean War, the Iraq wars, none of those were declared as actual war by congress.

And yet, they were still wars, with lots of deaths of Americans. Clearly, those that are committed to fighting wars, don’t feel like they require the distinction of being legally declared wars by Congress.

The war on drugs is just political rhetoric and has no actual legal bearing.

And yet many people have died, been imprisoned, and died as a result. Just try to tell people who are serving years or decades in prison that their sentences were just “political rhetoric,” and had “no actual legal bearing.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 322K

    Comments