[fraa-orolo]

> The direct profit motive leads to "forfeiture corridors". This is where typically drugs will go in one direction and the resulting cash will go in the other. The police will set up to seize only the cash going in one direction and not care one iota about the drugs going the other way.

That just sounds like drug dealing with extra steps.

[woodruffw]

> That just sounds like drug dealing with extra steps.

It comes as no particular surprise that American law enforcement, below the Federal level, is not actually all that interested in stopping illegal drug trafficking. Illegal drugs mean more crime, and that's good business for them!

[site-packages1]

Not that I agree with civil forfeiture, in fact I'm highly against it, but I don't think of it as drug dealing even if the money comes from drugs. They police did not manufacture or sell the drugs, so it's a pretty big leap to call seizing cash drug dealing in any form.

Maybe "theft with extra steps" because they do in fact essentially steal the money and add the extra steps to legally inoculate themselves against the consequences if they were to go and just steal the money.

[standardUser]

If the focus is on skimming off the top instead of actually stopping the flow of drugs, then the cops become a component in the illegal drug market. They are essentially running protection for that market... from themselves.

[everforward]

The leaders of cartels and triads also don't manufacture or sell drugs, they just profit off other people doing it. The money mules also don't actually touch any drugs.

Either way, profiting from the sale of illegal drugs is uncomfortably close to drug dealer.