10,700 arrested in FBI sweep

[Thump553]

Mass arrests of 10,000 or more are clearly a publicity stunt. Think about it-if the police know the current whereabouts of 10,000 known crimminals, are they not remise in their duties by failing to pick them up immediately? Unless, of course, they are pretty low level offenses, like parole violations for failure to report new addresses, etc.

Usually this sort of thing is a publicity stunt designed to boost the appeal of an (elected) district attorney, or to help justify the police department's budget requests, or to show a "toughness on crime" by the current administration (state or federal, depending on who is doing the sweep). I could only speculate for the reasons for the federal government pulling this publicity stunt now, but will not do so without further evidence. But it clearly is a publicity stunt of one sort or the other.

 

[Jhhnn]

The million or so fugitives from justice number is probably the normal situation. As some are apprehended, more go on the lam. Nothing unusual about that. Just part of the process, an artifact of reality.

But the Attorney General making a big deal out of the apprehension of 0.1% right before an election is obvious political posturing, just another Repub attempt at casting illusions, as transparent as the air we breathe.

Failure to recognize the obvious isn't a sign of partisanship, but rather of blind partisanship...

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ya know, when we questioned the timing in the Foley scandal you all acted like we were crazy.
But here you are questioning the timing of this story.
Personally, I would think the arrest of 10,000 people would be a good thing. I guess you are upset that they didn?t wait until after the election so these bad guys could go vote Democratic right?

Who said the arrest of a 10,000 people was a bad thing? The arrest of a 10,000 people all at once is certainly questionable and not common.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ya know, when we questioned the timing in the Foley scandal you all acted like we were crazy.
But here you are questioning the timing of this story.
Personally, I would think the arrest of 10,000 people would be a good thing. I guess you are upset that they didn?t wait until after the election so these bad guys could go vote Democratic right?

Who said the arrest of a 10,000 people was a bad thing?

The arrest of a 10,000 people all at once is certainly questionable and not common.

You guys are making me cry. :thumbsup:

 

[palehorse]

oh my tinfoil gawd...

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Failure to pay government fines and fees. Not your credit card debts. :roll:

 

[OutHouse]

ok, so how many are we missing from P&N and ATOT???

 

[Tom]

Sounds like good news to me. I'm not going to pretend to be smart enough to second guess law enforcement as to why they did it this way, I'm just glad they seem to be doing a good job.

 

[fitzov]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Failure to pay government fines and fees. Not your credit card debts. :roll:

Listen, before you go off spouting, you want to consider that your beliefs might be false. "Failure to pay" applies to credit card debts--in fact, any debt that results in a judgment--trust me, I know.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

I dont know which law failing to pay a bill falls under, do you?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Who says big govt isnt fun?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Failure to pay government fines and fees. Not your credit card debts. :roll:

Listen, before you go off spouting, you want to consider that your beliefs might be false. "Failure to pay" applies to credit card debts--in fact, any debt that results in a judgment--trust me, I know.

This is an amazing thing if true. The govt is now getting involved in the private sector litigation beyond the point of passing judgement or allowing the winner to put a lien(sp) on an asset. What happens if I dont pay my CC bill, does the state put me on work duty to pay it off?

Glad I dont like in the Peoples Republic of Mass.

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Failure to pay government fines and fees. Not your credit card debts. :roll:

Listen, before you go off spouting, you want to consider that your beliefs might be false. "Failure to pay" applies to credit card debts--in fact, any debt that results in a judgment--trust me, I know.

Post the MA statutue that states you will be jailed if you fail to pay a credit card debt.

I'd definately be interested in seeing this.


GENERAL LAWS OF MASSACHUSETTS - PART IV

 

[fitzov]

http://www.persicolaw.com/debt_collection.htm

If you file a complaint in District Court and the debtor does not appear, which happens often, then ask the court to enter a Default Judgment. After you get a Default Judgment, then request for an Execution. An Execution expires after twenty (20) years. In the Small Claims court if the debtor does not appear at the scheduled court dates, then a Capias will be awarded.

When a capias is awarded, the debt collector may return it to the sheriff's office--you will then have a warrant for your arrest.

 

[Lemon law]

To return to this thread---it seems to me there is another unanswered question---since Albarto Gonzales is a federal law enforcement officer---and can prosecute Federal crimes---what jurisdiction does he have in state crimes----if MR. A murders Mr. B---its a state beef---unless Mr. B happens to be a Federal officer---in which case it may become a Federal crime. With kidnapping the same until the perp crosses state lines---then it becomes Federal.---all kinds of fine line distinctions---some even fictional.

But it sure looks like most of these 10,700 are suspected of State crimes---what the hell is Alberto sticking his nose in it for?---especially since the arrest warrants must be signed by state officials---and not Alberto G.-------these wouldn't happen to friendly local republican state officials would it?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fitzov
http://www.persicolaw.com/debt_collection.htm

If you file a complaint in District Court and the debtor does not appear, which happens often, then ask the court to enter a Default Judgment. After you get a Default Judgment, then request for an Execution. An Execution expires after twenty (20) years. In the Small Claims court if the debtor does not appear at the scheduled court dates, then a Capias will be awarded.

When a capias is awarded, the debt collector may return it to the sheriff's office--you will then have a warrant for your arrest.

That's a civil judgment and civil warrant. NOT a crime. NOT a criminal offense. The debtor will not be put in jail. Except for fraud, child support, and government fines/fees, imprisonment for debt hasn't existed in America for at least 100 years (the US federal government eliminated the practice in 1833, the various states followed afterwards). This type of action just gives the creditor the ability to lien the debtor's property, if any, potentially giving the credit the right to repossess said property.
This type of tactic is usually done by smaller creditors, or with secured/collateralized debt (like car loans). Because credit card debt is usually unsecured, major credit card companies almost never do this, unless perhaps they suspect some type of major fraud. They simply write off the debt and move on, making only token efforts at collection (i.e. selling the debt to a collection agency for pennies on the dollar and/or leaving the black mark on the debtor's credit report). If the debtor files bankruptcy, then they do go through the bankruptcy court to try to reaffirm as much of the debt as possible.

This isn't a question of my "beliefs," pal. I am a banker. I have education and first-hand experience in how this works.

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
http://www.persicolaw.com/debt_collection.htm

If you file a complaint in District Court and the debtor does not appear, which happens often, then ask the court to enter a Default Judgment. After you get a Default Judgment, then request for an Execution. An Execution expires after twenty (20) years. In the Small Claims court if the debtor does not appear at the scheduled court dates, then a Capias will be awarded.

When a capias is awarded, the debt collector may return it to the sheriff's office--you will then have a warrant for your arrest.

That's a civil judgment and civil warrant. NOT a crime. NOT a criminal offense. The debtor will not be put in jail. Except for fraud, child support, and government fines/fees, imprisonment for debt hasn't existed in America for at least 100 years (the US federal government eliminated the practice in 1833, the various states followed afterwards). This type of action just gives the creditor the ability to lien the debtor's property, if any, potentially giving the credit the right to repossess said property.
This type of tactic is usually done by smaller creditors, or with secured/collateralized debt (like car loans). Because credit card debt is usually unsecured, major credit card companies almost never do this, unless perhaps they suspect some type of major fraud. They simply write off the debt and move on, making only token efforts at collection (i.e. selling the debt to a collection agency for pennies on the dollar and/or leaving the black mark on the debtor's credit report). If the debtor files bankruptcy, then they do go through the bankruptcy court to try to reaffirm as much of the debt as possible.

This isn't a question of my "beliefs," pal. I am a banker. I have education and first-hand experience in how this works.

Oh my.. fitfoz provided a link to an attorney's site..it appears that law office specializes in debt collections, bk's, etc..

And we all know that debt collection attorney's know the law :roll:
Debt collection law firms are the scum of the law practice world.

@ Fitfoz : I provided you a link to the general laws of MA. Please locate in there where it says a debtor can go to jail for a credit card debt.


Good thing I live in Maryland.. I would be in jail for 100 years since I have about 6 charge-offs due to credit card debt and have been sued once so far.

 

[herkulease]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
To return to this thread---it seems to me there is another unanswered question---since Albarto Gonzales is a federal law enforcement officer---and can prosecute Federal crimes---what jurisdiction does he have in state crimes----if MR. A murders Mr. B---its a state beef---unless Mr. B happens to be a Federal officer---in which case it may become a Federal crime. With kidnapping the same until the perp crosses state lines---then it becomes Federal.---all kinds of fine line distinctions---some even fictional.

But it sure looks like most of these 10,700 are suspected of State crimes---what the hell is Alberto sticking his nose in it for?---especially since the arrest warrants must be signed by state officials---and not Alberto G.-------these wouldn't happen to friendly local republican state officials would it?

Nowhere does the article say they would by the federal government. Federal agents just lent a helping hand to the state/local officials to round up all these people. Since it was a federal organized effort and he's the head of the DOJ, Alberto gets to have his time and talk to the press about it, take credit for it even if he had no role in organizing it except saying ok on it.

 

[Vic]

No, the site is mostly accurate. Fitzov just interpreted it wrong. You can't repossess collateral without clearing the action through the proper legal channels first, the final step of which is always through local law enforcement.
No one gets arrested or imprisoned though. Jeez, the last poor farm was closed in the US during WWII, IIRC.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Tab
Who said the arrest of a 10,000 people was a bad thing? The arrest of a 10,000 people all at once is certainly questionable and not common.

From the article in the OP

The arrests were conducted October 22-28 in the third installment of Operation Falcon, which Gonzales told reporters was designed to make "sure that there aren't second or third victims, especially children ... by a dangerous fugitive."

And now from Wikipedia
Operation Falcon, part 1, between April 4 and 10 2005 resulted in 10,340 arrests. (Why did the arrest these people in April? Couldn't they have watched them until the election.)
This one took place during "Crime Victims' Rights Week"

Operation Falcon 2 arrested another 10,000 fugitives during the same time frame in April 2006.

So this is the third major roundup of criminals as a part of this program. Amazingly, after the first round up in April of 2005 people were calling it a "publicity stunt."

It is true what they say, anything that is good for American is bad for the Democrats.

 

[fitzov]

You guys obviously don't know what a capias is. It means "you may take"--that's a warrant for arrest. Since I actually know people that have been in jail pending court dates for this, you guys are talking out your arse. Here's another link for you.

If all attempts to collect the money and to get the
Defendant into court have been unsuccessful, you can opt to have the individual arrested for an additional fee. The
Defendant can be arrested at home or a workplace.

http://worcestercountysheriff.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=13

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: fitzov
You guys obviously don't know what a capias is. It means "you may take"--that's a warrant for arrest. Since I actually know people that have been in jail pending court dates for this, you guys are talking out your arse. Here's another link for you.

If all attempts to collect the money and to get the
Defendant into court have been unsuccessful, you can opt to have the individual arrested for an additional fee. The
Defendant can be arrested at home or a workplace.

http://worcestercountysheriff.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=13

I won't argue against that of course..

The thing is on a credit card debt, the course of action is usually:

1) Creditor first tries to collect
2) If no luck, creditor transfers or assigns the debt to a collection agency that they work with..
3) If previous action doesn't work, the creditor usually will sell the debt, and all including papers, monies, etc, for a % to an outside collection agency (or debt buying collection attorney).. Usually pennies on the dollar..

4) Then that junk debt buying collection attorney will try to collect; if no luck.. file the action in small claims district court and either one of these two actions will happen:

1) Plaintiff wins judgement; files a writ of execution for the judgement, and places a hold on the debtors checking/savings account and gets paid

2) Plaintiff loses; judge dismisses case.. debtor wins..


Either way, a debtor cannot or will not go to jail for a credit card debt.

 

[Vic]

Fitzov seems to have a bit of difficulty understanding the legal difference between criminal and civil.

Putting his quote into context:

If all attempts to collect the money and to get the Defendant into court have been unsuccessful, you can opt to have the individual arrested for an additional fee. The Defendant can be arrested at home or a workplace. Please be aware, however, that a Physical Arrest will only guarantee that we will get the Defendant into court; we have no control over any judicial decisions or payments once he or she is in court.

 

[fitzov]

lol

My claim was that you can be arrested for debt. I've given proof, and one of you still emphatically denies it. Banker? Don't take care of my money, please. Like I said, I know people that have been in jail after being arrested for not paying credit card debt after a judgment was issued.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fitzov
lol

My claim was that you can be arrested for debt. I've given proof, and one of you still emphatically denies it. Banker? Don't take care of my money, please. Like I said, I know people that have been in jail after being arrested for not paying credit card debt after a judgment was issued.

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fitzov
I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown of what these people are wanted for. I'm fine with rounding-up dangerous criminals, but if it includes people wanted for "failure to pay (credit card bills)" for example, then I'm not.

Failure to pay your debts is not a crime. Where are you from that you think it is?

In MA, "failure to pay" is actually a crime. That means the sheriff can come and bring you to jail.

Failure to pay government fines and fees. Not your credit card debts. :roll:

Listen, before you go off spouting, you want to consider that your beliefs might be false. "Failure to pay" applies to credit card debts--in fact, any debt that results in a judgment--trust me, I know.

If all attempts to collect the money and to get the Defendant into court have been unsuccessful, you can opt to have the individual arrested for an additional fee. The Defendant can be arrested at home or a workplace. Please be aware, however, that a Physical Arrest will only guarantee that we will get the Defendant into court; we have no control over any judicial decisions or payments once he or she is in court.

:roll: