3 ms·

I'm not sure it's just "weight on individual rights". Those ten guilty men reoffending are going to cause damage to other people (assuming it's not something l

I'm not sure it's just "weight on individual rights". Those ten guilty men reoffending are going to cause damage to other people (assuming it's not something like jaywalking). So for me as a person who just wants to live my life, not subject to being a victim of false arrest, and also not being a crime victim, there's a trade-off. The higher the rate of false positives, the more likely I am to be arrested, tried, jailed, and perhaps even executed for something that I didn't do. But the higher the rate of false negatives, the more likely I am to be robbed, beaten, or killed by someone who was let go rather than jailed. The "send one innocent to jail" can and will be abused by people in power. The "free 10 guilty" can and will be abused by professional criminals. You can't make it perfect with imperfect people to implement the system. The best you can do is set the trade-off to minimize the damage to society. Unfortunately, this means some people being damaged each direction - some innocent people jailed, and some people being harmed by guilty people who were let off.

bee_rider 3y ago
There are also plenty of non-trade-offs, for example. 1) Generally wasting resources locking up innocent people means you have fewer resources to spend locking up the guilty ones. 2) If you have poor investigation that nabs an innocent person as the culprit, you might stop investigating prematurely and not catch the real perpetrator. 3) A culture that locks up innocent people makes every interaction with the cops potentially life-ruining, which will make people less likely to come forward as witnesses, etc.
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  On the other hand, a culture that doesn't lock up repeat offender guilty people makes every interaction with everyone potentially life-ruining. So even in that area there is a trade-off.

bee_rider 3y ago

There are also plenty of non-trade-offs, for example. 1) Generally wasting resources locking up innocent people means you have fewer resources to spend locking up the guilty ones. 2) If you have poor investigation that nabs an innocent person as the culprit, you might stop investigating prematurely and not catch the real perpetrator. 3) A culture that locks up innocent people makes every interaction with the cops potentially life-ruining, which will make people less likely to come forward as witnesses, etc.

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
On the other hand, a culture that doesn't lock up repeat offender guilty people makes every interaction with everyone potentially life-ruining. So even in that area there is a trade-off.