4 ms·
That's not at all what's being said. There are far more possible cases that could be prosecuted than there are resources to prosecute them, so to better discour
by mwfunk 9y ago
That's not at all what's being said. There are far more possible cases that could be prosecuted than there are resources to prosecute them, so to better discourage all crime they will tend to go after higher profile targets, in particular those who flaunt their criminality.
Similarly, cops don't spend all their time giving out tickets to every single jaywalker or every single speeder. That would be a waste of their time. But they need to give out some tickets every once in a while or else the law becomes meaningless. Given a choice between giving a ticket to a random person spotted jaywalking, vs. giving a ticket to someone who took out a full page ad the day before declaring the time and place in which they plan to jaywalk and taunting the police for being unable to do anything about it, the police will choose to give the ticket to the latter person, and that totally makes sense to me.
That's very different from going after socially awkward people who don't know when they're being assholes.
- mdpopescu 9y ago> But they need to give out some tickets every once in a while or else the law becomes meaningless. This has actually been shown to be a very bad idea. It is way better to punish immediately, even if lightly, every single transgression than to do it randomly but more severely. (Probably because we're all thinking "it won't happen to me".) What you're saying afterwards is "the mundanes should not taunt their rulers". True in the world-as-is, but that reinforces a caste system. No. The cops and the judges are NOT nobility. They should NOT be treated as superior to the little people.
- danso 9y agoShkreli is one of the “little people”?