Robin Hanson wrote:
What do folks think of the following analogy? We don't object to police being able to pay willing informants, but we would certainly
I strongly object to police using my tax money to pay stool-pigeons. The possible benefits of this system are heavily outweighed by the drawbacks (police fraud, false accusations, benefits for despicable criminals).
(Even more revolting is the system of police enticing people to commit crimes - stinges- and then prosecuting them. This seems to be such an everyday occurence in the US but I have seen very little opposition to it on the net. Can it be that growing up with such a system makes it seem fair? Many USAns don't even seem to know that such police tactics are forbidden in many European countries - and crimes commited after such enticements certainly not prosecutable.)
it was forbidden in the US between the late 60's and the early 80's. what is even more threatening than this is DARE and similar programs that encourage people to nark on their friends and family. josh