4 ms·

I agree with you entirely about individual actors within corporate structures being prosecuted way too infrequently. Every manager who deliberately undercounted

I agree with you entirely about individual actors within corporate structures being prosecuted way too infrequently. Every manager who deliberately undercounted employees hours should be in prison, and it's an injustice that there's a disparity that favors structural crime over personal crime. (I don't necessarily agree about civil forfeiture, in that the police are acting on behalf of the state - the structure itself is what is taking property without due process. That's more harmful to individuals because there's no recourse, but the fault is primarily with the law rather than with individual officers.)

jakelazaroff 5y ago
Thanks. I guess it's hyperbolic to say "no one" is calling for these things. But it's frustrating to see so many people frantically pointing to the visible tip of the problem, and seemingly indifferent to the structural issues lurking beneath the surface. Re: civil asset forfeiture, I don't understand the distinction you're making. Why do you support accountability for individual actors within corporate structures (managers underpaying employees) but not within carceral structures (police confiscating from civilians)? In both cases, the theft is enacted by individual agents and protected by the overarching structures. That said, I don't even agree that it's solely a structural problem! The median amounts taken can be as low as a few hundred dollars [1]. I can't find the link, but the last time civil forfeiture came up on HN there was a story saying that police routinely shake down pedestrians for small amounts, knowing that the cost to get their money back would exceed the amount taken. [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/police-say-seizing-property-without-trial-helps-keep-crime-down-a-new-study-shows-theyre-wrong https://www.propublica.org/article/police-say-seizing-proper...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- torstenvl 5y ago
  > In both cases, the theft is enacted by individual agents and protected by the overarching structures. No. Civil forfeiture is unfortunately the law of the land. Individual police officers are not responsible for domestic law or department policy. Employee wage theft is emphatically not the law of the land. Managers and employers who do this are committing a crime. They are responsible for their own actions because those actions are not sanctioned by law or required by policy. Additionally, in the case of wage theft, the bad actor often benefits directly if they are the owner of the establishment or, as a manager, they receive a bonus related to cost savings. By contrast, civil forfeiture benefits the government, not the individual officer.
  - jakelazaroff 5y ago
    Revisiting this because I found a Twitter thread laying out what I was referring to [1]: > A few years ago, when I was at the public defender's office, my very poor clients kept telling me the same story: they would be walking down the street and DC police would stop them, search them at gunpoint, tell them to open their wallets, and take all the cash they had. (2) > The wildest part? The DC police would then send them a letter saying that, if they wanted to challenge the police taking of their cash, they would need to pay either $250 or 10% of the amount taken, whichever was more! (3) > … > A lot of the time, cops were taking $5 and $30 from extremely poor people who were struggling to meet the basic necessities of life for their children, like buying food and diapers and shoes. (7) That is called mugging. And it may be the law of the land, but that doesn’t absolve these dirty cops of their misdeeds. Just like those managers, individual officers are making the choice to steal from people, incentivized and protected by their department. [1] https://twitter.com/equalityalec/status/1412428330792542209?s=21 https://twitter.com/equalityalec/status/1412428330792542209?...

jakelazaroff 5y ago

Thanks. I guess it's hyperbolic to say "no one" is calling for these things. But it's frustrating to see so many people frantically pointing to the visible tip of the problem, and seemingly indifferent to the structural issues lurking beneath the surface. Re: civil asset forfeiture, I don't understand the distinction you're making. Why do you support accountability for individual actors within corporate structures (managers underpaying employees) but not within carceral structures (police confiscating from civilians)? In both cases, the theft is enacted by individual agents and protected by the overarching structures. That said, I don't even agree that it's solely a structural problem! The median amounts taken can be as low as a few hundred dollars [1]. I can't find the link, but the last time civil forfeiture came up on HN there was a story saying that police routinely shake down pedestrians for small amounts, knowing that the cost to get their money back would exceed the amount taken. [1] https://www.propublica.org/article/police-say-seizing-property-without-trial-helps-keep-crime-down-a-new-study-shows-theyre-wrong https://www.propublica.org/article/police-say-seizing-proper...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
torstenvl 5y ago
> In both cases, the theft is enacted by individual agents and protected by the overarching structures. No. Civil forfeiture is unfortunately the law of the land. Individual police officers are not responsible for domestic law or department policy. Employee wage theft is emphatically not the law of the land. Managers and employers who do this are committing a crime. They are responsible for their own actions because those actions are not sanctioned by law or required by policy. Additionally, in the case of wage theft, the bad actor often benefits directly if they are the owner of the establishment or, as a manager, they receive a bonus related to cost savings. By contrast, civil forfeiture benefits the government, not the individual officer.
- jakelazaroff 5y ago
  Revisiting this because I found a Twitter thread laying out what I was referring to [1]: > A few years ago, when I was at the public defender's office, my very poor clients kept telling me the same story: they would be walking down the street and DC police would stop them, search them at gunpoint, tell them to open their wallets, and take all the cash they had. (2) > The wildest part? The DC police would then send them a letter saying that, if they wanted to challenge the police taking of their cash, they would need to pay either $250 or 10% of the amount taken, whichever was more! (3) > … > A lot of the time, cops were taking $5 and $30 from extremely poor people who were struggling to meet the basic necessities of life for their children, like buying food and diapers and shoes. (7) That is called mugging. And it may be the law of the land, but that doesn’t absolve these dirty cops of their misdeeds. Just like those managers, individual officers are making the choice to steal from people, incentivized and protected by their department. [1] https://twitter.com/equalityalec/status/1412428330792542209?s=21 https://twitter.com/equalityalec/status/1412428330792542209?...