Lunch Links

Friday, March 5th, 2010

Digg it |  reddit | |  Fark

51 Responses to “Lunch Links”

  1. #1 |  supercat | 

    //People who defend scoundrels in a court of law aren’t defending heinous acts they’re defending the Constitution.//

    If the worst violations of the Constitution occur against heinous people, then it is right and proper to defend such people against those in government who violate their rights. Unfortunately, however, many ‘rights’ organizations favor criminals over innocents, even when the latter are being more severely attacked.

    If the organizations really were interested in protecting people’s rights, they’d be all over cases where a prosecutor was trying to persecute clearly-innocent people. Among other things, a prosecutor who persecutes people who are clearly and demonstrably innocent will almost certainly also be prosecuting many people who are unable to demonstrate that they are innocent even though they are. Removing such prosecutors from power would help protect everyone’s rights, but for some reason many “rights” organizations really don’t seem interested.

    I would argue that overzealous protection of the guilty actually works to the detriment of the innocent. If police and prosecutors know that attempts to prosecute criminals will garner more flak than attempts to prosecute innocents, they will have less motivation to go after real criminals, and far more willingness to expend efforts on going after the unprotected innocents.