That's a classic slippery-slope argument there. That is to say, a non-argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sli

That's a classic slippery-slope argument there. That is to say, a non-argument: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope There's nothing "authoritarian" about imposing criminal penalties on those responsible for not just violations -- but as in this case, egregious, massive and intentional violations of consumer protection regulations. It's just how a civil society works.