|
|
|
|
|
by jessaustin
3725 days ago
|
|
Responsive? I thought we were talking about the law. You asked, incredulously, if I thought a certain set of actions should be legal. I told you why I think they should. In short, the harms of inconsistently-enforced inherently-arbitrary only-for-bigcos laws such as these exceed those of not having such laws. I stipulated at the very top of the thread that the investigation was surely very expensive. Most citizens wish these giant conglomerates, whether in media or banking or whatever, were smaller. We're not mollified when the costs of their giant size are passed along to the taxpayer and average citizen. Actual crimes with actual harms to actual victims should still be crimes, whether they involve computers or not. |
|
Even if you adopt the position that we should have laws that treats victims differently depending on how big their companies are, that wouldn't have much bearing on this case.