Hacker News Reader

Comment by chc | Hacker News Reader

If I were to tell you that an unarmed black man was shot by police, and that most people in one political party thought this was bad and most people in the other political party condemned people who protested the shooting, do you think you could guess which political party is which?

Heck, look at Joe Arpaio, who recently got pardoned for unconstitutionally targeting Hispanic people who haven't been convicted of any crime. Which party was generally in favor of this, and which party was strongly against? Again, the same parties as the first case.

The conservative movement in America — even a lot of people in the "small government" basket of the movement — has a huge blind spot when it comes to the police.

View on HN

You may be interested to know that the Koch Brothers are leading the charge for criminal justice reform:

https://www.charleskochinstitute.org/issues/criminal-justice...

Which doesn't mean a lot of "conservatives" aren't blind to the police. But there are a large number of them who do realize the vast overreach of law enforcement, while trying to understand the best way to ensure our streets remain safe.

>Heck, look at Joe Arpaio, who recently got pardoned for unconstitutionally targeting Hispanic people who haven't been convicted of any crime. Which party was generally in favor of this, and which party was strongly against? Again, the same parties as the first case.

Look at Obama and title nine where kangaroo courts violate due process on a national scale, violating the constitutional rights of american citizens no less. You can't simply point at the worst actors in a group of people and say they represent the whole, but I'd like to point out that Obama was elected via a national majority of democrats while Joe Arpaio was elected via the votes of a single district.

I'm not pointing to the worst actors in a group of people and saying they represent the whole. I'm pointing to whether this group of people actually thinks these actions are "the worst." The evidence (e.g. https://today.yougov.com/news/2017/08/25/politics-pardoning-...) suggests they generally do not.

And while I agree with you about Title IX kangaroo courts, I think that's kind of a strained comparison both in terms of the specifics of that situation and in how broadly it seems to indicate support for "tough" law enforcement.

Obama was not elected with Title IX process reform as his primary platform item. It was made into a bigger item after his election, but even then mostly on right-wing platforms. Few people are even aware of that controversy inside the blue bubble.

Arpaio was convicted on contempt of court specifically over unconstitutionally depriving people of their due process rights. Insofar as anyone can have any opinion about his case, and the associated pardon, that issue is at the front and center of it. Thus, anyone expressing support for Arpaio is necessarily expressing disdain for due process.

As Cyril Figgis said, "It's like comparing apples to Nazi oranges."

It's important to remember that while everyone has the same constitutional rights, they're not always equally applied. Miranda rights (and improvements to them) have the greatest effect on poor and minority groups. These groups often don't vote (a separate issue), but when they do, which political party do they vote for?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com