[temp453463343]

Confiscating your cash would need to be done with some kinda of judicial order, so it's not up to the president or someone who you "pissed off"

The drone killing is a seriously disturbing precedent, but with the backlash that's happened I think you won't be seeing that again (at least I hope).

The rest of your examples are definitely tools at the disposal of the executive branch, but they're on the same order of being put on the no fly list (the no-fly-list was more of an illustrative example than a definitive list of what the government can do). Annoying, but not at all equivalent at all to being jailed (as the parent comment stated).

[triplesec]

That is actually vastly incorrect. Your cash can be seized by cops etc with little redress: see as an example http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/05/police-i...

[rogerbinns]

> Confiscating your cash would need to be done with some kinda of judicial order ...

In the US your assets can be seized by the police before you are convicted. This is especially the case with drug related matters. This website has details (and advocacy) http://www.fear.org

[temp453463343]

That's really messed up. More outrageous than the TSA... Thanks for the link and sharing the information. Why isn't this discussed more? I guess we only talk about news, not our preexisting long term problems (ex: prisons)

[joelrunyon]

> The drone killing is a seriously disturbing precedent, but with the backlash that's happened I think you won't be seeing that again (at least I hope).

Because "backlash" stops people with enough incentive from regularly getting rid of people that inconvenience them.