undefined | Better HN

0 pointscaconym_5d ago0 comments

I don't think both-sidesing this is particularly appropriate. Law enforcement officers who abuse their position to harm people under false pretenses should be prosecuted as criminals, because that's what they are. This is true in any political environment and entirely distinct from the Trump administration's malicious and baseless abuse of the legal system against Trump's perceived enemies.

You are demonstrating what I think will be one of the most pernicious outcomes of the Trump administration's transformation of the Justice Department: the blurring of lines between law enforcement, criminality, and corruption as the institution is debased and public trust is lost.

0 comments

ikeboy5d ago

Public trust should be lost, because these institutions were never trustworthy.

I am not both sidesing. I'm saying that there are better reform options than adding additional criminal statutes that are likely to be abused.

Put simply, do you want the Trump administration to be able to bring criminal charges against any prosecutor or judge that they can argue brought a bad case?

caconym_OP5d ago

You could make this argument about anything. We should have no laws, because they might be abused by a malicious prosecutor. Utter nonsense.

ikeboy5d ago

We should indeed get rid of many laws because the benefit is outweighed by the abuse.

America has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the world (used to be #1) but suggest that maybe we're overcriminalized and you must be talking nonsense.

caconym_OP5d ago

You are not suggesting that "maybe we're overcriminalized". You are suggesting that we should not hold law enforcement accountable for egregious abuses of power that do real harm to real people. You think it should not be considered criminal for a police officer to put somebody in prison (under threat of bodily harm or death, by default) just because they feel like it, or whatever. You think police officers should be able to rape innocent travelers on the side of the road and face no consequences for it. You think police officers should be able to scream conflicting orders at somebody and then shoot them in the head because "they were reaching for a weapon".

Or do you not? All these things happen in America, and the officers involved almost never face meaningful consequences. Where do you draw the line, if at all?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ikeboy5d ago

Public trust should be lost, because these institutions were never trustworthy.

I am not both sidesing. I'm saying that there are better reform options than adding additional criminal statutes that are likely to be abused.

Put simply, do you want the Trump administration to be able to bring criminal charges against any prosecutor or judge that they can argue brought a bad case?

caconym_OP5d ago

You could make this argument about anything. We should have no laws, because they might be abused by a malicious prosecutor. Utter nonsense.

ikeboy5d ago

We should indeed get rid of many laws because the benefit is outweighed by the abuse.

America has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the world (used to be #1) but suggest that maybe we're overcriminalized and you must be talking nonsense.

caconym_OP5d ago

Or do you not? All these things happen in America, and the officers involved almost never face meaningful consequences. Where do you draw the line, if at all?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse