3 ms·

> Buddy, jail, not prison but jail is the place that you could find yourself tonight without a judge or jury. The only requirement for jail is probable cause o

> Buddy, jail, not prison but jail is the place that you could find yourself tonight without a judge or jury. The only requirement for jail is probable cause or an officer having a bad day. Ignoring the snark tone - Yes, exactly! Those people exist, so shine a light on their cases to garner sympathy, support and mindshare towards reform. It would be infinitely easier to sympathize with someone who's actually being treated unfairly. I'd go further and say that writing about the "woes" of SBF is insulting to anyone's who's actually suffering from unfair treatment. Trying to use SBF as the poster child of unfair treatment is frankly delusional. If you want to come across as genuine, write about the working class people whose stories would never see the light of day without someone taking a closer look, not the "woes" of a billionaire kid who's crossed every single boundary that's ever been set for him, who's interfered with justice process, and is now complaining about having to eat peanut butter because he refuses more nutritious food.

jrflowers 3y ago
The purpose of using SBF as an example is not to paint him as a victim in need of help. It is a useful exercise that invites the people that are ideologically opposed to the idea of humane treatment in prisons to pop up and voice their reasoning for force feeding vegans meat and denying people prescribed medication. > so shine a light on their cases to garner sympathy, support and mindshare towards reform. And > now complaining about having to eat peanut butter because he refuses more nutritious food. Are incompatible statements. In your final sentence you literally say that the problem is not the availability for vegans to have access to their diet. You cannot logically claim to care about jails providing reasonable diets to prisoners while simultaneously placing the blame squarely on a prisoner. You either think that the state punitively denying someone a reasonable diet and prescription medication is a good thing or a bad thing. There is no inbetween. Even if you use “deterrent” style rhetoric to lend legitimacy to your personal enjoyment of seeing somebody you dislike suffer, you are still pointing at the state punitively denying people access to reasonable diet accommodation and prescription medication and saying “This is a good thing.” Like, it’s kind of funny that you’re giving me tips on how to better illustrate this problem to people that are against inhumane treatment in jails. You’re not even the audience for such a thing because you are ideologically in favor of the phenomenon.

jrflowers 3y ago

The purpose of using SBF as an example is not to paint him as a victim in need of help. It is a useful exercise that invites the people that are ideologically opposed to the idea of humane treatment in prisons to pop up and voice their reasoning for force feeding vegans meat and denying people prescribed medication. > so shine a light on their cases to garner sympathy, support and mindshare towards reform. And > now complaining about having to eat peanut butter because he refuses more nutritious food. Are incompatible statements. In your final sentence you literally say that the problem is not the availability for vegans to have access to their diet. You cannot logically claim to care about jails providing reasonable diets to prisoners while simultaneously placing the blame squarely on a prisoner. You either think that the state punitively denying someone a reasonable diet and prescription medication is a good thing or a bad thing. There is no inbetween. Even if you use “deterrent” style rhetoric to lend legitimacy to your personal enjoyment of seeing somebody you dislike suffer, you are still pointing at the state punitively denying people access to reasonable diet accommodation and prescription medication and saying “This is a good thing.” Like, it’s kind of funny that you’re giving me tips on how to better illustrate this problem to people that are against inhumane treatment in jails. You’re not even the audience for such a thing because you are ideologically in favor of the phenomenon.