IRS - intimidation without accontability

Everyone knows about the onerous law by which your bank must report to the IRS, any cash transactions that exceed $10,000. Supposedly this is part of the idiotic and pointless war on drugs, the assumption being that only drug dealers deal in cash.

Well, here's the problem when you give virtually unlimited power to corrupt bureaucrats. Their scope expands and they start seizing bank accounts of everybody on nothing more substantive than a bank report. No criminal suspicions and no accusations are necessary. And here's the real trouble: local law enforcement gets a cut of the booty when ever the IRS gets blindly lucky and finds an actual criminal, which isn't very often. Of the 629 bank seizures in 2012 alone, only 20% of them resulted in prosecutions. The other 80% just had their lives turned upside down when the IRS drained their bank accounts.

When did it become legal in the US for the government to seize assets of private citizens without due process? Once this wide-net practice was dragged out into the light, IRS officials scurried like the cock-roaches they are, to promise that from now on, they would only focus on people with other criminal indicators besides dealing in cash. But if their focus will now be only criminals, what was their focus before?

I never thought the $10,000 law was constitutional to begin with. What business is it of the government how I like to handle my money? Are there not better ways to catch criminals than having banks rat out their customers in the hopes that you'll stumble on a drug dealer out of the bunch?

No wonder more Americans than ever are renouncing their US citizenships and leaving for less tyrannical countries to live in. If I could afford it, I would.