Why is this a problem? Minor offenses are still offenses and they can often be very frustrating and problematic. They still deserve police attention where they constitute a violation of the law. Streamlining the process is a positive not negative, and the framing here just seems like these activist groups don’t want people to be held accountable.
I suggest you show the courage of your convictions, and do a few hour's research on exactly how much is illegal at present.
Then, turn yourself in for only the Federal crimes you've committed in the past year.
We'll never see you again, of course, but it's a small price to pay.
Be careful of what you wish for. You might wish to look at your local municipal/county/parish/state laws. I likely break dozens of laws/ordinances every day and I'm very positive you do as well, without even knowing it.
I am very saddened that I have to spell this out. I don't know whether you use NextDoor, throwawaysea. Would you be willing to post this under your real name in NextDoor and share the link here?
The problem, as is always the case, is that "minor offenses" are not equitably enforced.
So if the local white kids are hanging out at the corner of the park smoking weed, no one cares. No one posts to Nextdoor. The police don't show up. But four young hispanic men walking through the same white neighborhood (to get to a job, say) will freak someone out and a busybody post to nextdoor will end up getting them stopped. Oh, and it turns out that one of them has weed in his pocket. There's your "minor offense". It's still an offense, right? It deserves police attention?
You're looking at this with a microscope. No one is saying don't enforce boring laws. People are saying do it fairly. Nattering busybodies on Nextdoor are the opposite of fair.
Okay but then isn't that the real problem? Of not regularly weeding out laws against things that people don't really feel need to be banned? It's kind of clumsy to take the approach of, "We're going to keep dubious laws on the books, and also have ultra-random, haphazard enforcement of all laws regardless of how merited."
Non-enforcement of bollocks laws is a feature.
Most people will not ever interact with law enforcement over bollocks laws.
There will always be bollocks laws.
Your wider point stands though, we should do some pruning, but that takes time, whereas non-enforcement is instantaneous.
Do both.
It’s the reporting of the suspicion.
I don’t need my neighbour calling the police on the suspicious of $minor_offence.
Any examples?
Flash mob style, waiting in line, no! camping out for days waiting in line, not to buy tickets to the next reiteration of $sameoldstorybutwithmorelensflare, but to turn yourself in with video evidence of jaywalking or cycling without a helmet.
That sounds to me rather like you're saying "tell us your real name or you're lying", which seems a rather specious (and hostile) argument.
His example is something like 'Yes, I came here to apply for a loan of a billion dollars for an ant farm, yes I would like a complimentary coffee.'
It's an entertaining idea.
It's by the way really annoying that my question gets downvoted by zealous users who think I'm trying to make some kind of point when I was just genuinely interested. This site feels like a big aggressive battlefield nowadays, where everyone is just arguing and no-one is discussing like normal curious human beings.
What is more fair than locals choosing which stuff is bothering them?
I think that's how life and a fraction of the people in a large group tend to be everywhere.
And sometimes can be good to try to guess how others will interpret one's intentions, and write sth to sort out misunderstandings before they happen
But not always easy to guess / remember to
That is actually a very bad thing, and once the people in power abuse
If few people encounter "bollocks" laws then there is no outrage over their enforcement, therefore if you piss off the wrong person in government suddenly they go over your life with a fine tooth comb and you have 100 "bollocks" charges and your life is ruined but since you are just one person there is no so speak out for you.
>There will always be bollocks laws.
That is a bollocks position and one that can be solved (in part) with mandatory sunset of all laws. Every Law, Regulation, and policy should have to be affirmed by the legislature at minimum every 20 years if not more often. If not is ceases to exists
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22530/does-the-...
There may be noble outcomes from this, but there are also clearly negative ones. Once again, I'm not claiming it was ever ND's intent to do this. Just that in practice the design of the system enabled and tacitly encouraged these behaviors.