8 ms·
Pedantic, but "plotting to kidnap a governor" can (and should) be shortened to "plotting to kidnap". The job of the person they were targeting is related to the
by t-3 4y ago
Pedantic, but "plotting to kidnap a governor" can (and should) be shortened to "plotting to kidnap". The job of the person they were targeting is related to the crime only tangentially via their motives. The crime of kidnapping would be a crime regardless of whether they did it for politics, money, or fun. Adding "a governor" makes it seem as if you believe governors are more important than other people, and that kidnapping them should be punished more harshly. That's totally antithetical to a democratic society free of discrimination.
- itsyaboi 4y agoA governor is absolutely more "important" than your average Joe. Pretending that laws are enforced evenly is naive at best and a openly bad faith argument at worst. All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.
- generj 4y agoThis goes beyond the governor being part of the elite and thus more likely to be protected by the law than an average citizen (unfortunately the case in the US). Attacking high public officials functionally is equivalent to attacking the state itself. Of course a government is going to punish people who attack it more harshly than those who do not. To do otherwise is to give a green light to anarchy and future attacks on the government.
- TrapLord_Rhodo 4y agoIt absolutely is. Literally and legally. You go from a charge of kidnapping to a charge of kidnapping of a federal official, which is way worse legally.
- landemva 4y agoHow is a governor in a State a federal official?
- TrapLord_Rhodo 4y agoThere's literally tons of different variations (public official, defense attorney, etc. etc.), but my point is it's worse legally than regular kidnapping.
- whateveracct 4y agoThere's a difference and it's just the letter of the law. You get convicted of "providing material support to terrorism" when the person you're plotting to kidnap is a governor.