>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.
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.
Re:MIT faulted over its support for students
by omegaworks on Monday March 17, 2014 @12:01AM
(#7412955)
>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...
Also wrong because in many states convicted felons are disenfranchised. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement#Unite... . "As of 2010, all the various state felony disenfranchisement laws added together block an estimated 5.9 million Americans from voting."
Well, thank God for that. Let me rephrase then: Everyone who isn't a complete and total loser gets to vote.
I find it very odd that a convicted felon in Kentucky is unable to vote, and considered a "total loser" by you, while someone who did the same crime in Maine has not lost the vote, and so is not a loser.
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.
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.