(no title)
efuquen | 4 years ago
The comparison is between two things, the police forcing you to give them access your phone for no explicit reason, or the police forcing you to allow them to physically and invasively search your whole body for no explicit reason. You are conflating that comparison with a bunch of other things happening external to the specific actions the police are allowed to do.
The reasons why both are happening doesn't mean you can't objectively compare whether what the police are doing is acceptable outside of the larger situation that is causing them to do it. The question is if one seems unacceptable, shouldn't the other be too? If you want to talk about levels of violence between these two, stop and frisk certainly seems to be something closer to approaching physical violence, or at least the greater potential for it, then searching your phone.
wslh|4 years ago
Your argument is completely valid except there is a missing [postmodern?] point at a meta level: you are changing the focus of a terrible event that should be solved at a global scale to an event that could be handled at a local scale, AND in US it should be much simpler than in Russia.
In US you have a lot of ways you can do that and I am always amazed that the US democracy is failing at a basic level when I compare with righteous US people who achieved amazing stuff in the US past. If you don't show your mobile founds you can protect you by the law.
In Russia there are much fewer options and civilians are risking their life at an amazing level. Law does not exist.
scarface74|4 years ago