7 ms·
> Is it a disgrace for the law to find a way to stick it to them? If you don't uphold the civil rights of the loathsome, then those protections won't be there
by bmelton 9y ago
> Is it a disgrace for the law to find a way to stick it to them?
If you don't uphold the civil rights of the loathsome, then those protections won't be there to protect the righteous.
It's worth remembering that while Shkrelli is super unlikeable, at various points in history, so were Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, etc.
- Larrikin 9y agoAll of those people were jailed for their actions. Their actions were considered noble by a large number of people so there were multiple lawful and unlawful protests that brought pressure on the government to change the law.
- stale2002 9y agoYes, and it was BAD that those people were jailed. They were jailed because the system was broken. And it would be better if the system was NOT broken.
- nickysielicki 9y ago> Yes, and it was BAD that those people were jailed. In absolute terms, it was bad that those people were jailed, but with respect to the system, it was good that those people were jailed because it served to highlight the clear disconnect between the laws and what was right and wrong to society. It's unrealistic to expect institutions to make changes without going through the process. If Rosa Parks never went to jail there would have never been the protests which brought about change. If you think the actions by Shkreli should have strong punishment, it's a bad thing if Shkreli gets the book thrown at him artificially. You're not setting precedent and you're not fixing the system. Someone in the future will do something similar and, depending on the court, they'll get off with a slap on the wrist. You should root for things to be done by the book so that everyone can realize, "hey, this book sucks!" and it gets changed through legislation.