GOING TOO FAR?

It's increasingly felt it has become too easy for law officers to seize
property prior to conviction.

As it turns out, you don't have to take drugs to suffer from drug-
induced hysteria.

Growing numbers of people believe asset forfeiture laws, in particular
those in Kansas, go too far in allowing law enforcement authorities to
seize assets. Under Kansas law, cash or other property that authorities
believe is in any way connected to illegal drug activity may be seized
by officers -- and kept.

While other states require that a person be convicted of a crime before
his property can be forfeited, Kansas law does not. A mere civil
procedure, with a much lower standard of proof, is all that is
required.

In addition, some people -- such as state Rep. Ralph Tanner, R-Baldwin
City -- see it as a conflict of interest that state law allows law
enforcement agencies to keep a good share of the drug-related assets
they confiscate.

He's right.

In our zeal to curb trafficking in illegal drugs, we appear to have
gone too far in stepping on the rights of still-innocent civilians.

Moreover, anytime large amounts of cash or property are involved in any
sort of transaction, the possibility of corruption is very real. Then-
attorney general Robert Stephan said that about the advent of casinos
in Kansas a few years ago; recently a Kansas Lottery official was
charged with 268 counts of computer crime in the alleged theft of
$60,000.

And while we hope that law enforcement officials are above reproach, we
can't assume it. A civilian at the police department recently was
charged in the theft of cash from the property room.

We need to make things tough on drug dealers, no doubt. But we're still
innocent until proved guilty, right?