Hacker News Reader

Comment by jmull | Hacker News Reader

An aside: “monkey patch” doesn’t mean what you think it means.

More on topic… crimes aren’t all the same, and the willingness of a person to commit one kind of crime doesn’t necessarily mean they are willing to commit another kind of crime.

For example, a large proportion of drivers in the US break the law every time they drive, from speeding to rolling stops, etc. By your standard all of these people are criminals who we can expect to keep reaching for “criminal solutions”. Why shouldn’t we imprison or deport all such people? Or at least take away their driver’s licenses and cars?

View on HN

Oh yes you are right for monkey patch, I don't why it means something else where I am from.

On the topic, sure. But maybe next time you go to another country, try to think how you would stay and break the law. Later, you will need a car, a bank account (by stealing a social security number or other solutions). Like how you are getting yourself ready to live a life of breaking the law just to go by in life. That's a series of life-changing events you have to be ready to go through. And yes you can go to prison because yo go too fast on a highway but to me it's really something else.

You're saying sanctuary cities lead to more people buying cars and opening bank accounts... that's the bad thing?

Cars that can be stolen and/or with no insurance, people who flee the scene in case of accidents, bank accounts that have been opened by identity thieves, etc...

Are you saying that criminals are a good thing if they help the overall economy? If not what was the point?

I’m suggesting it may be a bad idea to criminalize ordinary and even positive behavior.

I think you’re making a better argument in favor of sanctuary cities than against. All the bad things you describe are the result of fear of immigration enforcement, and which suppresses positive things like buying cars and opening bank accounts.

Of the options you mentioned the law only prescribes taking away driver licenses AFAIK. And you could, see no problem with that.

The point is, people are breaking the law all the time, that law is rarely enforced, yet no one seems to be calling for a widespread crackdown on speeding.

The previous poster calls on us to be concerned about crimes and criminals leading to more crimes, but we already live in a country where very large numbers of “criminals” are driving around all over the place, yet it doesn’t seem to be a problem.

You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another.

> You might ask yourself why it’s supposed to be a big problem for one kind of law but not for another.

It is not a hard question. Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm and therefore the law calls for lesser punishment for violations.

> Speeding has already been determined to be of lesser harm

Determined by whom? Each year, speeders kill more people than illegal immigrants.

Questionable, to put it mildly. And not just the claim, but it's relevance, considering you might want to count per capita.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com