[CryptoPunk]

So essentially your support for punitive measures is politically and ideologically motivated.

>>Involving retail investors in that willful ignorance should merit prosecution.

Making the litmus test for whether someone should be prosecuted your personal evaluation of the ignorance of their political views is pretty far from any semblance of justice.

[JumpCrisscross]

If someone is walking into a dangerous swamp, and you offer them a map, and they say "fuck your map" and then perish in a marked peril, I think it's okay to have limited sympathy. The peril isn't more likely to spring because they chose to be ignorant. They're just more likely to blunder because of it.

The SEC's tendency to go ballistic when retail, i.e. unaccredited investors, are harmed is common industry knowledge. This common knowledge was ignored. The ignorance isn't a reason for prosecution. But it increases the chances that prosecutable mistakes will be made.

Securities law is too complicated to blunder through mindlessly. When I saw how many promoters and investors were doing just that, it was natural to conclude they would, relatively quickly, break important laws and conventions. They have, and the regulators are pissed just as they would be with anyone else making the same mistake.