| > Isn't incarcerating a person who's not a danger to others and who's crime had no harmful outcomes a waste of everyone's time and money? Yes, but I think the solution is to make fewer things criminal through the democratic process first. Enforcement of laws is important. It’s one thing to put people in jail who don’t belong there. But according to this article it kinda seems like Swartz did deserve some jail time. He knowingly broke the law and showed no remorse. Instead his view was that the law should not apply to him because he did not agree with it. That’s a dangerous mindset to have for an individual with money and power. It’s important to show remorse and contrition in these circumstances, otherwise we can just assume the behavior will continue. And Swartz had a history of this kind of behavior starting with PACER, so really it should have been expected that failing to prosecute in this instance would have been taken by Swartz as a signal to behave like this with impunity. > I encourage you to learn about the conditions in prisons. I 100% agree with you, and know all about this topic, but that’s really a different conversation. |
Agreed, unfortunately it seems that we selectively enforce laws based on political pressure. Look at the numerous high profile cases targeting white collar criminals, for example with Purdue and the Sackler family.
They got away with zero jail time and a slap on the wrist (financially), all because they were able to hire the right political actors who could influence the outcome of legal procedures.
I'm sure if Swartz was similarly connected (for example a family who was a Senator), this whole thing would have gone away quietly.
Alas, the laws that apply to the commoners do not apply to the elite.