> They can use discretion on civil asset forfeiture too, if they want.
That's how it works already. That's also why they can do it to whoever they like.
That's how it works already. That's also why they can do it to whoever they like.
It seems like you've been suggesting just that "the relevant authorities should use their discretion." That doesn't strike me (or, apparently, others) as much of a reform, since that exactly describes the status quo, which does not seem to be working.
What is the role for oversight that you're suggesting? Who does the overseeing? How?
>I'd encourage anything at this point.
fennecfoxen was advocating that it isnt worth trying something
>You want meaningful reform on anything within 500 miles of this topic from the legislature? Good luck.
The goalposts were clearly moved from if even attempting reform is a waste of time, to having a workable solution
Legislatures don't want to make any change unless the people want it. People have to demand it.