4 ms·
They want toughness on violent crime, not government agents perpetrating crimes for their own benefit. These agents profit from destroying people's lives, and
by nirvana 14y ago
They want toughness on violent crime, not government agents perpetrating crimes for their own benefit.
These agents profit from destroying people's lives, and they Break the law when they do so.
The problem is, who is going to prosecute the prosecutors? Whose going to collect evidence? The police who enjoy protection by prosecutors? The judges who work for the same employer?
- mercurial 14y agoBut it's all a balancing act. If you vote for a system where disproportionate penalties are possible, and the incentive to use it as leverage to secure convictions is built into the system, don't be surprised of the consequences: it's perfectly predictable. Remove disproportionate sentences and mandatory minimums, and prosecutes won't be able to exert the same pressure.
- __--__ 14y agoThey want to feel safe. In the case of the hotel owner, even some here on HN felt that the action was justified. They may not have condoned the methods, but they obviously liked the result - a hotel that seemed to attract crime was shut down. The reality is irrelevant - it made them feel safer to know the authorities would do something if a similar hotel were to be found in their neighborhood. It also makes people believe the authorities are doing something to clean up bad neighborhoods, which also makes them feel safer. I wish I had an answer to how to make sure this doesn't happen again, but I don't. As long as the majority of Americans have safety as their #1 concern, things are only going to get worse. And if I knew how to change the attitude of an entire nation, I would be making a killing in marketing.