4 ms·

Same thing. You're punishing people whom you haven't convicted of doing anything harmful just to make the police's job easier, without regard for justice or pro

• bena 5y ago
  It's entirely with regard for justice. That's the goal. You're looking for ways to evade justice. It's evident in your choice of words. You're concerned with conviction of something harmful. The harm they committed was in the other crimes. They should evade punishment for that because they managed to hide it well?
  • nybble41 5y ago
    > It's entirely with regard for justice. That's the goal. Your ends may be laudable but your means are immoral. The ends do not justify the means. > You're concerned with conviction of something harmful. The harm they committed was in the other crimes. They should evade punishment for that because they managed to hide it well? You say they're evading punishment "because they managed to hide it well" but the fact remains that you were never able to prove they actually did anything worthy of being punished for in the first place. Don't you see the obvious error in that? The only thing you actually know is that their financial transactions were not documented to your satisfaction. In effect you're demanding that they prove their innocence, whereas in a just system one is innocent until proven guilty.