Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

2
  • 3
    "Getting off on a technicality" - the other side of the coin is that there are already entire organisations dedicated to fighting against wrongful convictions, even without a police state. "Many people assume that the police and prosecution are quite fallible" - I wouldn't call that an "assumption". It's been well-demonstrated that humans are fallible, and the police particularly so. It's a conclusion based on evidence. This also feeds into "Why do you fear surveillance". Commented Feb 7, 2025 at 8:30
  • 2
    @NotThatGuy, personally I have no doubt that a police state is a bad idea. For instance, I think that in the OJ Simpson case the police framed a guilty man and that the not guilty sentence was correct for that reason. The OP asked for the reasoning used by supporters, and I believe that all three bullet points are frequently used by many of them. Commented Feb 7, 2025 at 11:21