After the police agencies in California threw such a fit that the courts made concealed carry 'shall' issue, the government threw such a fit that they wholesale published the names, addresses, and DROS details of everyone in California with a CCW, including say DV victims that might be in hiding and even hilariously judges and prosecutors [].
They tried to make it sound like a 'leak', but it was published on a polished government website that let you filter and aggregate the results.
The problem is that voters will say "I care about X" in a poll, and even while talking to family members, but they refuse to break rank when filling out a ballot.
It doesn't matter how many Republican voters say they want weed to be legal or want to end civil asset forfeiture, as long as they keep voting for people who back the blue, it doesn't matter what they want, it matters what they vote for
America's terrible political funding system and two parties mean that breaking ranks for a "small" thing like ending civil asset forfeiture would guarantee you end up getting the "other" guy, so people don't.
Then our primary system has such little engagement from the average voter that it only serves to make politicians more extreme, not more representative.
The problem is that I care about X, but I also care about Y and Z. And there are only two candidates.
If we switched to approval voting (a checkbox next to each candidate, can check multiple candidates, whoever gets the most checks wins)...then we wouldn't need primaries and I'd be able to vote for anyone I'm "okay" with. Then my vote for X would still count.
By design courts aren't held accountable by the people. Especially federal ones (aware this is a state court here, though).
SCOTUS for instance, who might hear the case, are nominated by government executives, not the people. They have zero incentive to do anything other than to garner favors from the government. That is why you walk away with insane judgements like Wickard v Filburn.
Of course, you could argue the seizure is an 8th amendment violation. Then you would take note you can go to jail for 10 years for not paying a $5 tax for any other weapon as defined by the NFA, and starting next year you can go to jail for a decade for not paying a $0 tax.
Because it doesn't get used against wealthy or connected people so they have no reason to care. Cops like it because they get to steal shit with zero risk, courts are ambivalent about it because its legal and courts still get money for the case regardless, politicians like it because it makes their police budget seem cheaper and it will never be used against them.
Readit News
They tried to make it sound like a 'leak', but it was published on a polished government website that let you filter and aggregate the results.
[]https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-06-29/californ...
Deleted Comment
It doesn't matter how many Republican voters say they want weed to be legal or want to end civil asset forfeiture, as long as they keep voting for people who back the blue, it doesn't matter what they want, it matters what they vote for
America's terrible political funding system and two parties mean that breaking ranks for a "small" thing like ending civil asset forfeiture would guarantee you end up getting the "other" guy, so people don't.
Then our primary system has such little engagement from the average voter that it only serves to make politicians more extreme, not more representative.
If we switched to approval voting (a checkbox next to each candidate, can check multiple candidates, whoever gets the most checks wins)...then we wouldn't need primaries and I'd be able to vote for anyone I'm "okay" with. Then my vote for X would still count.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state
SCOTUS for instance, who might hear the case, are nominated by government executives, not the people. They have zero incentive to do anything other than to garner favors from the government. That is why you walk away with insane judgements like Wickard v Filburn.
Of course, you could argue the seizure is an 8th amendment violation. Then you would take note you can go to jail for 10 years for not paying a $5 tax for any other weapon as defined by the NFA, and starting next year you can go to jail for a decade for not paying a $0 tax.
If your rights get in the way they'll just make it an administrative or civil fine like a traffic ticket or zoning violation.
This is specifically a punishment (effective fine) tied to having been convicted of certain crimes in Alaska.
This would also seem to violate the eighth amendment as both cruel and unusual and in effect an excessive fine.
It's also marginally useful and we're on the upswing end of this law-and-order cycle.
So long as it nets the state more than it costs it will continue.
And of course, there's all sorts of useful idiots who will justify it when used in furtherance of their niche pet issues.