[Cyber Liberty]

I don't deny anything you say. But it's a slippery slope to a very bad place when we start jailing people "for their own good." I have a quote from C. S. Lewis I keep posted over my desk about the dangers of exercising tyranny "for the good of its victims."

My wife was a Court Reporter for years, and she has filled me in on the "But I Luv Heem!" statements. I am not insensitive to that. I would not approve of jailing a vic just so later I don't have people complaining I didn't protect her, as this DA specifically says in the story. (It's a quote, so it's not leavened with the bias you detect.) How selfish can a government drone be?

As I said, if "zero tolerance" is the game, then we need to jail everybody alive to keep them from becoming crime victims. It's the only way to shut the critics up. It's the same thing, the only difference being the level of degree.

Here's the CS Lewis quote. It's best read in its entirety.

[AnAmericanMother]

Big fan of Lewis, and understand exactly what you're saying.

My only point is that we don't have all the facts here, and that there ARE possible justifications for this other than just "police state".

On the one hand, somebody's got to figure out a way to protect idiots.

On the other hand, people who report a crime, get somebody else arrested, and then go back on their word should have SOME consequences for that act.