3 ms·
My problem isn't with the statistics. My problem is that the law depends on fuzzy bits of information that are easy to rhetorically manipulate in order to direc
by emotionalcode 12y ago
My problem isn't with the statistics. My problem is that the law depends on fuzzy bits of information that are easy to rhetorically manipulate in order to direct a case towards (complete and total financial asset seizure, immediately) or (not). It's not logical. The seizure is not reliant on facts. It is not reliant on evidence.
This demonstrates an imbalance between ability to determine truth, and ability for the powers that be to act. It is dependent purely on abstract pattern. Other commenters have pointed out that that model can be used to accurately represent the behavior of innocents.
I'd much rather see data on the effectiveness of this law. Does it actually track suspicious activity? Does it work, and is the value of that work enough to justify the grief it creates to the few you refer to that the law affects?
- maxerickson 12y agoI think I'm just separating concerns more than most here. I guess because I'm not that outraged by society doing something unjust (because look around). Does it sound like the law is being used unfairly? Yeah. Does it sound like the law as written is easy to use unfairly? Maybe, probably yes. Would I oppose changes to the law intended to make it harder to abuse? No. Do I think it is a major practical concern for a typical small business or individual? No. I don't think it is inconsistent or difficult to hold all those ideas at once.