Your theoretical model for how the system works falls short of reality. If you truly think the law is applied equally among all, you need to do some serious research. The powerful among us don't have to obey the laws like everyone else. Finally, it isn't the powerless among us writing or influencing those who do write the laws.
Actually, the laws in the US are pretty evenly enforced. It's as close as you're going to get in the real world.
>Finally, it isn't the powerless among us writing or influencing those who do write the laws.
Everyone gets to vote. Granted, we can't all make large campaign contributions, but ultimately the vote is what actually matters.
Wrong, on the most basic level. [1]
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_State...
You can of course define "total loser" to include someone who has been disenfranchised, but that would be an unusual definition that seems deliberately constructed to misinform.
Instead, they are elected by "electors" who are chosen by popular vote on a state-by-state basis.[3]
Lawrence Kohlburg classifies this kind of reasoning at the fourth of six stages of moral development. [1] Laws are created by people - no, even worse: by committee. Do you think people who have committed no violence on others ought to be stripped of their education and opportunities?
>The upside is people in power have to obey the laws just like everyone else.
This principle is violated time and time again by people in power. Consider the recent fines imposed on HSBC for facilitating money laundering in latin america. A pittance. A slap on the wrist. The consequences for them didn't even come close to the profits they made.
1. http://brianwilliamson.id.au/cit/level1/psych1/kohlberg.pdf
Great. When I want Lawrence Kohlburg's opinion I'll seek it out.
>This principle is violated time and time again by people in power.
If by "time and time again" you mean "rarely, in the great scheme of things".
Depends. If it's a felony where you are, then yes.
>What about people like Edward Snowden?
What about him? If the feds ever catch up with Snowden he'll go to jail, and that's where he belongs.
>Should he have gotten the Aaron Swartz treatment too if he were at MIT? Right, because all laws are just.
Justice is a subjective thing, and that's why legislatures write the laws. If you're going to have the rule of law you have the rule of law. The upside is people in power have to obey the laws just like everyone else. The downside is everyone else has to obey the laws too.