"Civil forfeiture" they call this, where the local Police Department essentially steals your stuff, and the burden is on you to prove why you should get it back. Of course you'd assume the local PD couldn't possibly be allowed to keep it themselves, surely it is remitted into some state or federal government fund.<p>Well, enter the "Equitable Sharing" program, which was halted/curtailed in 2015 when there was a furore about it, but has apparently resumed[1]. This is where the actual local PD that seized your money really does get to keep 80% of it themselves, with only 20% going to the feds.<p>But for some reason the locals aren't allowed to spend this money on op-ex (salaries etc) so they often spend it on crazy equipment which they can obtain via the Department of Defense's 1033 Program[2][3] which allows PDs to buy excess military equipment like weaponized vehicles, armored personnel carriers, grenade launchers, and helicopters -- obviously contributing to the increasing militarization of police[4].<p>Conflict of interest much? More confiscation of citizen funds == more toys for the boys at the PD.<p>All funded by money and assets seized from citizens on highly questionable grounds, with no real semblance of due process. Not great.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/28/the-feds-have-resumed-a-controversial-program-that-lets-cops-take-stuff-and-keep-it/" rel="nofollow">https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/28/the-f...</a><p>[2] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program</a><p>[3] <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/aclu-report-on-police-militarization-2014-8" rel="nofollow">http://www.businessinsider.com.au/aclu-report-on-police-mili...</a><p>[4] <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/asset-seizures-fuel-police-spending/" rel="nofollow">http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/as...</a>