91 year old man collects artifacts over 8 decades; FBI seizes collection

unsung · April 2014

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/03/thousands-cultural-artifacts-seized/7244431/

Federal Government: serving and protecting.

No charges filed, no expected return date.

"Legal" theft.

rgambs · April 2014

bummer for this guy! At least they didnt take his house!
It is very likely a collection like this has many stolen/illegally obtained items...but why not charge the man and make it on the up and up..this fella will pass before his collection is scrutinized and his items will be dust in the wind.

callen · April 2014

This is fked. Innocent till proven guilty.

go pre · April 2014

bummer. how about the story that follows this one when you click the right arrow?
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/2014/04/06/savannah-shooting-death-boy/7379477/
odd how that's possible.

and apparently, this one did shoot itself, says the article: "Police say the boys were handling a gun at a house on Church Street around 9 p.m. Friday when it fired."

brianlux · April 2014

My immediate reaction is that at 91 I don't really care if the guy is charged or not, it just seems great to me that these items have been confiscated and will hopefully end up in museums where they belong.

unsung · April 2014

So you're ok with theft?

vant0037 · April 2014

So hypothetically, if these were cultural items that had been taken illegally by this guy over decades and the government was reclaiming them to return to their rightful owners (think: a scenario like in "Monuments Men"), would you still have a problem? I read the whole article. It didn't mention how the guy got them, and it also didn't mention why the FBI's "art crime" team was involved. But just because those tidbits aren't in a story doesn't mean they don't exist. My guess? They've got a warrant and this is part of an investigation.

But as always, shoot first, ask questions later, right?

unsung · April 2014

I prefer to side with the individual until proven guilty, unlike yourself that sides with government on nearly every thread I post on these forums.

Didn't you have to take some type of Oath, Counselor?

vant0037 · April 2014

You can paint me as a government apologist all you want. I can just as easily paint you as someone who jumps to conclusions without knowing all the facts, or worse, someone who trusts everything he reads in the media because it serves his view of things. Trust the government or trust the media. Pick your poison I guess.

As far as an oath, yes I took one. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Was the Constitution violated here? If so, please articulate the facts that prove it. I read your article and it looked to me like these things were seized as part of a criminal investigation.

I'm not sure why my profession offends you. But I challenge you on your threads because I think you place too much trust in things you read on the Internet. Trust in government isn't warranted either, but there is at least a process to challenge the things government does. This 91 year old man has a court process to challenge the taking of his property. By what method would you challenge the media? It's not that I trust the government and it's motives; it's that I trust media and corporations less. With government, facade or not, there's at least a process with which I can challenge it.

You didn't answer the question either.

brianlux · April 2014

Obviously this thread is not about stolen or lost artifacts or the guilt or innocence of the man in possession of the artifacts. Its about being unhappy with government. Maybe even about anarchy. Want some anarchy? Here ya go! :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbmWs6Jf5dc&feature=kp

unsung · April 2014

vant0037 said:
You can paint me as a government apologist all you want. I can just as easily paint you as someone who jumps to conclusions without knowing all the facts, or worse, someone who trusts everything he reads in the media because it serves his view of things. Trust the government or trust the media. Pick your poison I guess.

As far as an oath, yes I took one. I'm not sure what you're getting at. Was the Constitution violated here? If so, please articulate the facts that prove it. I read your article and it looked to me like these things were seized as part of a criminal investigation.

I'm not sure why my profession offends you. But I challenge you on your threads because I think you place too much trust in things you read on the Internet. Trust in government isn't warranted either, but there is at least a process to challenge the things government does. This 91 year old man has a court process to challenge the taking of his property. By what method would you challenge the media? It's not that I trust the government and it's motives; it's that I trust media and corporations less. With government, facade or not, there's at least a process with which I can challenge it.

You didn't answer the question either.

I did answer your question, maybe the answer given just wasn't suitable for your needs.

A seizure took place, no charges have been filed as of yet, so maybe once the investigation is complete this 91 year old man will still be alive to accept the return of his belongings. I'm sure they will find some violation to be sure that they will "hopefully end up in museums where they belong" as someone else advocated.

Your profession does not offend me, neither do you, I simply don't understand your decision to always side opposite of the individual. Does it matter if the Constitution was violated? To me, that's a minimum standard. Imminent Domain and Income Taxation are technically Constitutional, but it doesn't mean that they are right or that I will agree with them.

vant0037 · April 2014

unsung said:

I did answer your question, maybe the answer given just wasn't suitable for your needs.

A seizure took place, no charges have been filed as of yet, so maybe once the investigation is complete this 91 year old man will still be alive to accept the return of his belongings. I'm sure they will find some violation to be sure that they will "hopefully end up in museums where they belong" as someone else advocated.

Your profession does not offend me, neither do you, I simply don't understand your decision to always side opposite of the individual. Does it matter if the Constitution was violated? To me, that's a minimum standard. Imminent Domain and Income Taxation are technically Constitutional, but it doesn't mean that they are right or that I will agree with them.

No, you didn't answer the question. I said: if it's determined that these items were illegally obtained by this guy, and this whole seizure was part of criminal investigation, would you still have a problem with it?

You keep pointing out that no charges were filed; so what? Criminal investigation doesn't require instantaneous charges. Seizure doesn't require instantaneous charges. It requires a warrant. Are you sure there wasn't a warrant? How do you know there aren't charges coming? How do you know the items aren't subject to, say, a sacred items reclamation law (e.g. laws that require the return of even legally purchased religious items to Indian tribes).

You keep saying that the Constitution was violated; please provide the facts that support it. You've provided a link to a news story and boldly proclaimed it as an example of government abuse. I've asked to you articulate - WITH FACTS - from the story that prove, for example, that these items weren't subject to a criminal investigation, or that there was no warrant, or that the warrant was faulty etc. In short, I've asked you to do your homework.

Does my asking you to do that mean I'm "siding against the individual?" I don't even know what that phrase would mean. I am however unwilling to conclude that every time I read something I don't like means it's unconstitutional or illegal or immoral etc. It might just mean - gasp - that I don't have all the information, or that it's incomplete picture.

So. That's leaves us with your implication this is an example of unconstitutional government tyranny. You've cited a news story that says a large collection of items were seized from a 91 year old guy and that the FBI's "art crime" team was involved.

You're the proponent of the claim that the government was wrong here. What are your facts for backing that up?

callen · April 2014

If they have hard proof dude stole this stuff it's one thing. Having a hunch and breaking into an individuals home sucks. He could of bought stuff fair and square. Course I don't have details but understand the frustrations people have with the fkn man.

callen · April 2014

And doesn't matter if it's Native American as long as it wasn't stolen. Makes no difference.

Jason P · April 2014

It's a true sign that we don't actually own anything in The United States of America. We only rent.

Wish I would have understood that when I "bought" my house and land ....

JWPearl · April 2014

I found this interesting though quick tell your mother, i go tell my father..lol..its really annoying when your told you cant keep what belongs to you properly.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569963/Couple-10-million-haul-gold-coins-forced-half-new-fortune-taxman.html

unsung · April 2014

Jason P said:
It's a true sign that we don't actually own anything in The United States of America. We only rent.

Wish I would have understood that when I "bought" my house and land ....

So very true. Everything is allowed until you don't want to p(l)ay, then they take it all.

vant0037 · April 2014

Again, a lot of speculation with not a lot of information. But hey, it's the Internet right?

vant0037 · April 2014

callen said:
And doesn't matter if it's Native American as long as it wasn't stolen. Makes no difference.

That's really not true. There are lots of laws specifically regulating the collecting of Indian artifacts.

And even still, what if these items were obtained illegally?

What I don't get is, on its face, this looks like a criminal investigation. I could be way off, but at face value, that'd be my assumption. Some people have reached the opposite conclusion, without any more facts than I have. Why? Are we desperate for stories or news that "proves" some political point that we'll race to any conclusion, with or without facts to support?

I've still yet to hear from OP what facts he's found that make this whole operation unconstitutional. I've looked, and there isn't any info out there to conclude one way or another. So how are people sure this is government abuse and not law enforcement or criminal apprehension (something most of us would agree is important, right? Right?!

) )

unsung · April 2014

I never said it was unconstitutional. Go back and show me where I said that. I said its a gross abuse of power. It reminds me of the raids on Gibson Guitars. Are they following their laws written to aid themselves? Quite possibly. Does that make it right? No.

I don't trust government to keep itself in check, that goes against their self preservation.

Halifax2TheMax · April 2014

unsung said:
I never said it was unconstitutional. Go back and show me where I said that. I said its a gross abuse of power. It reminds me of the raids on Gibson Guitars. Are they following their laws written to aid themselves? Quite possibly. Does that make it right? No.

I don't trust government to keep itself in check, that goes against their self preservation.

What about the three branches of "government?" You know, checks and balances. Or is it all one huge giant web of abuse of power and conspiracy to you? Time for an Issa lead congressional oversight committee hearing or two or three, dontcha think? You act like this stuff happens in a vacuum or only started since January 2009. Where you been? And instead of voting for the 49th repeal of Obamacare, maybe the house should take up these "abuses" of power and taking away your "freedom" issues. But me thinks there might be more to this story than what your "sources" are telling you or maybe the family of the shrunken head would like it back, regardless of how it was "obtained."

Peace.

91 year old man collects artifacts over 8 decades; FBI seizes collection

Comments

Categories