No mass arrests.
"Mass arrests" are a tactic of authoritarian regimes in which dozens or hundreds of people are rounded up and confined because of who they are- an ethnic group, a religious group, an opposing political party, whatever. That's wrong, that's stupid, that's undemocratic and it's also unconstitutional.
What I want is individual arrests, backed by evidence and investigation, of people whose ACTIONS, including violence, harassment, terrorist threats, etc., constitute criminal conduct.
Let's be clear about the distinction.
We don't do "mass arrests."
We arrest suspected criminals, on credible evidence. We confine them awaiting trial ONLY when credible evidence also exists that granting them bail poses either further danger to the pubic, or substantial risk of their flight from justice. But we DO confine them, then.
We bring them to trial ONLY when a grand jury has reviewed the evidence and determines it constitutes sufficient reason for an indictment.
This is what makes us better than people who do mass arrests, who round up and confine people because of the color of their skin, the beliefs they hold, the language they speak, or their culture of origin.
We have, right now, hundreds of criminals at large and yes, many of them pose a danger to the public, and all of them need to be held accountable for their crimes.
Investigate and arrest each one.
It may amount to a large number.
But NO "mass arrests."
precisely,
Bright
= new reply since forum marked as read
