Oklahoma Police Admit Justice Is Not their Concern.

I-40 corridor in Oklahoma: Police don't want

the free-money spigot turned off.

We've heard plenty about asset forfeiture, in cash, cars, and even houses, that the police have been conducting for years. After the big exposé in the Washington Post earlier this year, the Justice Department and a number of state governments worked to stop the abuse. It has been, literally, highway robbery.

Police stop someone. They have a lot of cash. Police seize the cash based on laws that were supposed to help stop "the bad guys" in the War on Drugs. When, nonetheless, no offense is determined to have been committed and no arrest, in the end, is made, the police simply keep the money. And it's nearly impossible to get all or even some of it back.

This article in The Week about goings-on in Oklahoma reminded me of how odious the practice is. But what caught my attention was this: 

The ACLUOK figures do not include additional seizures of property, like cars and houses, or confiscations by federal (as opposed to state) officers. A Republican state senator, Kyle Loveless, has introduced a bill which would prohibit police from seizing money or assets from people without charging them with a crime. Oklahoma police have opposed the bill.

Of course the police don't want the gravy train to stop. But choosing to openly oppose the bill means that the police are more concerned with money than justice. Where am I wrong here? This is a no-brainer.