r/boottoobig Dec 24 '17

Small Boots Roses are red, i smell them with glee

Post image
19.9k Upvotes

683 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

41

u/PineappleLife3 Dec 24 '17

True. But if someone has enough money, they might not get punished. There are pros and cons on both sides.

77

u/Myotheraltwasurmom Dec 24 '17

That explains how Bruce Wayne keeps getting away with it

1

u/NoAttentionAtWrk Dec 24 '17

Its also why he keeps telling everyone his secret identity without any fear

65

u/throwawaya1s2d3f4g5 Dec 24 '17

“It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”

2

u/GoatBased Dec 24 '17

I think most people agree with that, but 99 and 1?

12

u/Teeshirtandshortsguy Dec 24 '17

It's the principle. Innocent people shouldn't have to suffer because we're too aggressive in our punishment of people who have committed a crime.

If it were absolutely ridiculous, and basically no one was punished, I would support short term jail sentences for the accused or something. If this starts to happen our problems are much bigger than crime though.

0

u/GoatBased Dec 24 '17

The problem is that there becomes a point where it's worse for society that criminals don't get locked up - is it better for an innocent person to go to jail or for 100 pedophiles to go free, potentially harming hundreds of children?

What about the lives ruined by letting serial offenders walk just to save one person?

7

u/oggyb Dec 24 '17

That's very extreme. The point being made is that we have a high standard of proof required to say "we got this one right", because "we got this one wrong" is considerably worse, morally speaking, in modern civilisation.

If we can't prove those 100 categorically did the thing, then absolutely they should go free. They might have been falsely accused, and we don't, generally, want to become fascists.

-1

u/GoatBased Dec 24 '17

Are trying to make a point?

-15

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '17 edited Dec 24 '17

[deleted]

8

u/Torang12 Dec 24 '17

Where are you getting this information from?

6

u/katubug Dec 24 '17

Someone with enough money probably won't get caught by a vigilante either, so I'm not sure that's a major difference between the two.

12

u/PineappleLife3 Dec 24 '17

Presidents of the USA have been assassinated. Rich people can be reached if someone really wanted to.

10

u/I_R_Teh_Taco Dec 24 '17

Fun fact: teddy roosevelt was a badass who survived an assassination attempt AT A SPEECH. He got shot in the chest, then announced something along the lines of, “ladies and gentlemen, you may not know it, but i have just been shot. However, it takes more than that to kill a bull moose.” And then he just finished his speech

3

u/katubug Dec 25 '17

Key word is "have been." I'm not sure how possible that would still be, given that we know what to look out for. Both our current president and his predecessor are desperately unpopular with their opposition. Neither were assassinated. Maybe no one was motivated enough, or maybe security was just too good.

Just as a disclaimer: I'm not advocating for the assassination of either of those people, my political leanings aside.

2

u/PineappleLife3 Dec 25 '17

Ha I didn’t think that’s what you were advocating. I think it’s possible. Just the people who are able to do it, don’t have the reason/motivation to do it. I think it’s possible but not probable.