This graph from the 2015 article "Law enforcement took more stuff from people than burglars did last year" really rammed this home for me:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-...
Its chart shows that burglary led from 2016-2018, but asset forfeiture was ahead again in 2023.
This is also only based on federal police statistics, because we don't have data available on state and local police forces who all participate in this looting.
Previous discussion, which mods removed from the frontpage once it was at the top: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36975143
The entire right side seems to be trying to redefine what "Burglary" means in everyday English. It means people stealing things, without the victims finding out right away, and without intimidating or threatening anyone.
The definition is completely overbroad, and seems like it's done with some agenda. Someone "entering with intent to commit a crime" is not always burglary, for example someone intending to defecate in a hallway or spray graffiti in the bathroom is not a burglar.
Robbery on the other hand is by definition a violent crime, the threat of violence is what distinguishes it from other forms of theft or larceny.
If you look at victim data it's roughly it's 3 million burglaries per year, about 1/3 of which are home invasions. And about 1/4 of those (so 1/12 of total) are also violent crimes where the resident is injured.
But then when it comes time to report crime stats some stuff gets partitioned off into other buckets (I guess to avoid double counting? Idk). So e.g. some sources will take those 250k assaults-during-burglary and not count them as burglaries.
It gets really confusing really fast.
This is exactly it for me.
When I first read that the TSA would report you to the DEA for carrying large sums of cash into an airport, and the DEA would intercept you and seize it, I’ve been referring to it as armed robbery.
When the DEA asks you to hand over the $10k in your backpack, they’re doing it under threat of violence. It’s armed robbery, they just haven’t “drawn their gun yet.”
Try sticking to “I’m sorry sir, you can not have my money” and you’ll quickly see what the full weight of the U.S. Government looks like when escalated against you.
From the time they decided they wanted your money, it was theirs.
Also, I’d add that robbery can be done by trick instead of threat of violence. E.g., a robber tricks victim into handing over their wallet or purse, then distracts them while they remove valuables. The victim may not even know they’ve been robbed until later. If the victim, later noticing she has been robbed, then has a heart attack and dies, however, then the robber could potentially be charged with felony murder.