3 ms·

These may be incredibly dumb questions, but... Can someone explain to me how making something illegal actually prevents crime? Is it really so difficult to pr

These may be incredibly dumb questions, but... Can someone explain to me how making something illegal actually prevents crime? Is it really so difficult to prove crimes are being committed without making something illegal? Why would anyone vote in favor of measures like this?

loup-vaillant 4y ago
Something must be done, we are doing something, something has been done. That's one bias: legislator wielding law to solve every and all problems like they would the proverbial hammer. Reinforced by the fact that they're public figures, surely they can't be caught doing nothing? A second, more pernicious possibility, is to make illegal stuff that is highly correlated with actual crimes, such that law enforcement can now arrest people for innocuous as a substitute for punishing them for the real thing. Think Al Capone being done for because of taxes of all things. A third, positively alarming possibility, is to facilitate arbitrary arrests. Probably wasn't the intent (it rarely is), but it does give ammunition to future governments or law enforcement, should they need to stifle, silence, or discourage political opposition.
- costco 4y ago
  > A second, more pernicious possibility, is to make illegal stuff that is highly correlated with actual crimes, such that law enforcement can now arrest people for innocuous as a substitute for punishing them for the real thing. Think Al Capone being done for because of taxes of all things. I think it's mostly this. If you read their example they're basically mad that they couldn't prove that the guy ("Mr A") had a bunch of illegal money.
anigbrowl 4y ago
It doesn't. It makes prosecution of crime easier by adjusting the threshold of criminality. It's not about crime being difficult to prove, so much as multiplying the reasons you could be charged with one, thereby raising the cost of doing business for criminals. People vote for it because there is plenty of cash to be made out of conditioning the public to feel as if they are under siege and danger lurks around every corner.

loup-vaillant 4y ago

Something must be done, we are doing something, something has been done. That's one bias: legislator wielding law to solve every and all problems like they would the proverbial hammer. Reinforced by the fact that they're public figures, surely they can't be caught doing nothing? A second, more pernicious possibility, is to make illegal stuff that is highly correlated with actual crimes, such that law enforcement can now arrest people for innocuous as a substitute for punishing them for the real thing. Think Al Capone being done for because of taxes of all things. A third, positively alarming possibility, is to facilitate arbitrary arrests. Probably wasn't the intent (it rarely is), but it does give ammunition to future governments or law enforcement, should they need to stifle, silence, or discourage political opposition.

costco 4y ago
> A second, more pernicious possibility, is to make illegal stuff that is highly correlated with actual crimes, such that law enforcement can now arrest people for innocuous as a substitute for punishing them for the real thing. Think Al Capone being done for because of taxes of all things. I think it's mostly this. If you read their example they're basically mad that they couldn't prove that the guy ("Mr A") had a bunch of illegal money.

anigbrowl 4y ago

It doesn't. It makes prosecution of crime easier by adjusting the threshold of criminality. It's not about crime being difficult to prove, so much as multiplying the reasons you could be charged with one, thereby raising the cost of doing business for criminals. People vote for it because there is plenty of cash to be made out of conditioning the public to feel as if they are under siege and danger lurks around every corner.