Scraped on 22/08/2025, 18:34:26 UTC
A "seized asset" implies something that was stolen by criminals from their victims.
In that case the seized asset should be given back to the victims. The government has no right to
hold on to it or sell it off for its own benefit.
If so then that would give the government a perverse incentive to falsely accuse you of stealing it
and provide them an excuse to seize your fundsbitcoin (even when you legitimately own it and never stole anything).
Original archived Re: US Strategic Reserve; is it right to actually use seized assets as reserves
Scraped on 22/08/2025, 18:30:04 UTC
A "seized asset" implies something that was stolen by criminals from their victims.
In that case the seized asset should be given back to the victims. The government has no right to
hold on to it or sell it off for its own benefit.
If so then that would give the government a perverse incentive to falsely accuse you of stealing it
and provide them an excuse to seize your funds (even when you legitimately own it and never stole anything).