4 ms·
> Given this context, I do not think the police should honor his request [to protect him] I vehemently disagree on this. Regardless of what you think of a pers
by AnonymousPlanet 4y ago
> Given this context, I do not think the police should honor his request [to protect him]
I vehemently disagree on this. Regardless of what you think of a person, no one should be subject to the violence of a vigilantist mob. Anything else is a huge step back into the middle ages.
It saddens me to no end that the kind of inhuman sentiment that is displayed in comments like the above is becoming more and more en vogue in modern civilization.
- Dylan16807 4y agoJesus, denying a proactive police guard isn't "inhuman". Try not to exaggerate things for the purpose of feeling righteous.
- gmflkgfds 4y agoMurderers on death row get "proactive police guard" protections in court. How is it not "inhuman" to deny at-risk civilians of one?
- Dylan16807 4y agoExtra police in court are even less necessary in most cases. But tons of people are at mild risk that doesn't warrant paying 1-6 cops' salaries to keep watch.
- bennysomething 4y agoYes but the primary reason given in the original comment was that they didn't like him, not the cost.
- Dylan16807 4y agoThe cost is obviously a factor. If it cost next to nothing, you wouldn't need to block users with insufficient real need, no matter how jerkish. Let protection be as easy as carrying an umbrella.
- AnonymousPlanet 4y agoThe GP apparently supports the idea of looking the other way while someone is threatened by an angry vigilantist mob. GP justifies this by their personal impression of the person's character. I don't think I'm the one here feeling righteous.
- Dylan16807 4y agoNot "looking the other way". Refusing to assign police to stand outside his home because some angry people knocked on his door. Those are very different things.