4 ms·
> They are referring to enforcing laws on just a certain subset of society. Or enforcing a certain subset of laws on all society. And it's not just the "bigbi
by Chris2048 5y ago
> They are referring to enforcing laws on just a certain subset of society.
Or enforcing a certain subset of laws on all society.
And it's not just the "bigbiz-friendly" reds, it's also the blues with their "lets not punish non-violent crime". The fact is laws in the US (and elsewhere) are written, but unevenly enforced, as such what remains is quibbling over priority. I want to see more punishments for white collar crime, but I also want to see less leniency for repeated blue-collar crime too.
- tolbish 5y agoThe difference being "the blues" have never pretended to be the party of law and order. Because, as you noted, the "bigbiz-friendly reds" do not actually support law and order either, the term "law and order" is in reality a dogwhistle. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_(politics) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_whistle_(politics)
- Chris2048 5y ago> the term "law and order" is in reality a dogwhistle funny that you brought it up then. You also provided a WP article to define "dog whistle", but nothing supporting "reds do not actually support law and order" which seems the crux of you argument.
- sidlls 5y agoLess leniency? "Blue-collar crime" in the US carries some of the most draconian penalties of any developed nation.
- Chris2048 5y agoSome of, as in, cherry-picked tails. It has some unreasonably selectively-lenient places too, Just ask Seattle. You also have to either take liberties with either "developed", or with "draconian", given some of the Asian and middle-eastern developed nations.