4 ms·

> especially for low level, non violent stuff This is codeword for financial, white collar crimes. So, it is definitely a policy serving the rich.

cynicalkane 2y ago
It's generally the disadvantaged and poor who get hit for low-level, non-violent stuff.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  Are they the ones also committing more of them statistically - is that why (or are you saying they are targeted)? And if so why is that the case - there are plenty of people who are disadvantaged and poor and don’t commit crimes. Look at various immigrant minority groups for example.
  - ternnoburn 2y ago
    [flagged]
- worik 2y ago
  > It's generally the disadvantaged and poor who get hit for low-level, non-violent stuff. In my country (New Zealand) judges let off young people who look like them, regularly. "This young man [not but almost always a man] has a great future and he should not be burdened...." That is if they are an aspiring accountant, laywer, sports star, etcetera If they are a young bricklayer, welder, etcetera it is tough luck It is absolutely disgusting. No wonder so many people want to burn the whole thing down
another-dave 2y ago
Minor drug offences could also fit that though — possession or even someone dealing weed mightn't be directly involved in any violence at all
- lofenfew 2y ago
  Or petty theft, shoplifting etc.
SoftTalker 2y ago
I think GP probably meant "stupid stuff young people do" minor drugs, drinking underage or even DUI, fighting, theft, vandalism. If you were under ~25, and it was "stupid kid stuff" why ruin someone's life. If you're 40 with a good job and get caught embezzeling, totally different in my view. Old enough to know better.
- ternnoburn 2y ago
  More or less, yeah, you got it.
WalterBright 2y ago
Shoplifting is low level, non violent, and very very common. The only shoplifting I've heard of by the rich is a famous actress who had a shoplifting fetish.

cynicalkane 2y ago

It's generally the disadvantaged and poor who get hit for low-level, non-violent stuff.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Are they the ones also committing more of them statistically - is that why (or are you saying they are targeted)? And if so why is that the case - there are plenty of people who are disadvantaged and poor and don’t commit crimes. Look at various immigrant minority groups for example.
- ternnoburn 2y ago
  [flagged]
worik 2y ago
> It's generally the disadvantaged and poor who get hit for low-level, non-violent stuff. In my country (New Zealand) judges let off young people who look like them, regularly. "This young man [not but almost always a man] has a great future and he should not be burdened...." That is if they are an aspiring accountant, laywer, sports star, etcetera If they are a young bricklayer, welder, etcetera it is tough luck It is absolutely disgusting. No wonder so many people want to burn the whole thing down

another-dave 2y ago

Minor drug offences could also fit that though — possession or even someone dealing weed mightn't be directly involved in any violence at all

lofenfew 2y ago
Or petty theft, shoplifting etc.

SoftTalker 2y ago

I think GP probably meant "stupid stuff young people do" minor drugs, drinking underage or even DUI, fighting, theft, vandalism. If you were under ~25, and it was "stupid kid stuff" why ruin someone's life. If you're 40 with a good job and get caught embezzeling, totally different in my view. Old enough to know better.

ternnoburn 2y ago
More or less, yeah, you got it.

WalterBright 2y ago

Shoplifting is low level, non violent, and very very common. The only shoplifting I've heard of by the rich is a famous actress who had a shoplifting fetish.