An honest question: have you actually read the opinion, or are you just responding to the arguments you imagine them to have made in justifying the stance the headline causes you to imagine them to have taken?
Is there anything in particular in the reasoning of the opinion that you disagree with? I get it that civil forfeiture is very unpopular around these parts (for the record, I'm against it too), but I think we all have a right to expect the discourse on HN to rise above the level of bomb throwing, even if (especially if!) we're on the same side.
Is there anything in particular in the reasoning of the opinion that you disagree with? I get it that civil forfeiture is very unpopular around these parts (for the record, I'm against it too), but I think we all have a right to expect the discourse on HN to rise above the level of bomb throwing, even if (especially if!) we're on the same side.