They are one extreme. Very aggressive policing and horrible human rights abuses, and low crime rates. Mexico and Brazil might be the other end, where police are horribly corrupt and just as likely to be the ones perpetuating the crimes than trying to stop them, and it is pretty much law of the jungle. I think we can agree both of these extremes are not ideal and we need to find a balance somewhere in the middle.Originally Posted by SrslySirius
Sorry to hear that you find the constitution so distasteful, pal. Maybe the Democratic People's Republic of Korea or Sudan are more your speed. They have very "proactive" policing.
The Constitution is actually a pretty fluid document that is interperted very differently in different places and times. There are a lot of things which are deemed to be unconstitutional today that weren't yesterday and vice versa. There is no clear consensus what is legal and isn't as far as police procedures, which is probably a good thing, because it gives policy makers flexibility to work within the political climate of the day. If the Constitution actually said, "No police officer should pull over and search someone for a bullshit crime because they have a suspicion they may be committing a much more serious crime," then police would really be fucked as far as trying to be effective to the detriment of us all.
Reply With Quote