3 ms·
> how is it not against the law to act on a foreign government's orders to harass citizens? When you consider that until very recently, it was legal for NYPD o
by thereare5lights 6y ago
> how is it not against the law to act on a foreign government's orders to harass citizens?
When you consider that until very recently, it was legal for NYPD officers to have sex with people in their custody, and indeed, in many places it is still legal for police to coerce sex from people in their custody, you'll realize that law is reactionary and until it becomes a problem that catches a politician's eye, it won't be illegal.
- TeeMassive 6y ago> When you consider that until very recently, it was legal for NYPD officers to have sex with people in their custody That has nothing to do with the subject.
- thereare5lights 6y agoOn the contrary, they're both things that should obviously be illegal. The question is why aren't things that should obviously be illegal not actually illegal. I answered that question. However, it seems like some people reflexively support the police so they don't read past the surface.
- TeeMassive 6y agoYour example is a glitch, of law, the other is obvious on its face.
- thereare5lights 6y ago> Your example is a glitch, of law, No it's not. In the past, it was lumped in with the right of cops to have sex with suspect, thus it was intentional to allow cops to catch sex workers. Calling it a glitch only shows how little people care about that particular problem and in fact reinforces my argument.