Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 393 posts

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#71

Post by pathseeker »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #68
slim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's pointing out that people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich. Which I did not get even after reading it. I'm thankful he pointed it out

> people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich When (and where) is there a difference? What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

>What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

Compared to this one? Nearly all of them. The neighborhoods in Mountain View are filled with affluent people that have no connection to federal politicians and no influence over the FBI at all.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#72

Post by pathseeker »

DoctorOW wrote: post #62
mangoTangoBango wrote: post #26

Quoted post unavailable.

> We should start over, get rid of those parasites, move the capital to the center of the USA like Lebanon, KS out of the swamp. The physical location of the capitol has been irrelevant since airplanes, cell phones, and the internet. The swamp is a metaphor, not a physical place.

That's not true. Significant amounts of lobbying and palm greasing happen in person, explicitly off of cell phones. It's not a coincidence that all of the companies that receive massive amounts of federal government money have headquarters around DC.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#73

Post by ehhhhhh »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #68
slim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's pointing out that people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich. Which I did not get even after reading it. I'm thankful he pointed it out

> people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich When (and where) is there a difference? What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

I understand that you're saying that rich people usually have political influence everywhere, but I believe the only rich people that have direct jobs in Washington, DC are the ones living in DC. The slumlord that went to high school with the mayor isn't the same as the white house official who is employed by the FBI director (hypothetically speaking).

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#74

Post by bryanrasmussen »

fareesh wrote: post #60

So in this case the agent says they went through the rear entrance instead of knocking down the front door Is it common for poorer neighbourhood houses to have a rear entrance? Genuine question - I don't know what the typical USA poor neighbourhood house has

yeah if you have a house as opposed to an apartment you probably have a rear door, and even lots of apartments have other ways of getting out than the door depending on lots of factors.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#75

Post by Symbiote »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #68
slim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's pointing out that people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich. Which I did not get even after reading it. I'm thankful he pointed it out

> people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich When (and where) is there a difference? What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

Diplomats and senior government officials have more political influence than their wealth would normally provide.

The highest paid government employees earn around $400k [1], foreign diplomats probably earn considerably less (e.g. £150k for the UK's [former] representative to the EU [2], which is the highest-paid ambassador position) but have perks like paid-for private school for children and tax exemptions.

[1] https://www.federalpay.org/employees/top-100

[2] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#76

Post by nullc »

pathseeker wrote: post #71
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich When (and where) is there a difference? What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

>What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects? Compared to this one? Nearly all of them. The neighborhoods in Mountain View are filled with affluent people that have no connection to federal politicians and no influence over the FBI at all.

Exactly. Surely wealthier people have more political influence all else equal. But busting down the door of a wealthy person in Mountain View is pretty unlikely to get anyone fired at the FBI. Go ahead, shoot their dog for good measure-- no problem.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#77

Post by DoctorOW »

pathseeker wrote: post #72
DoctorOW wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We should start over, get rid of those parasites, move the capital to the center of the USA like Lebanon, KS out of the swamp. The physical location of the capitol has been irrelevant since airplanes, cell phones, and the internet. The swamp is a metaphor, not a physical place.

That's not true. Significant amounts of lobbying and palm greasing happen in person, explicitly off of cell phones. It's not a coincidence that all of the companies that receive massive amounts of federal government money have headquarters around DC.

Yes, and if you move the capitol all of that moves with it. You literally admitted that those headquarters are located for the purpose of in-person meetings, not a love of DC. So unless the location you intend to move the capitol to is top secret, it's irrelevant.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#78

Post by bryanrasmussen »

dragonwriter wrote: post #58
alephnan wrote: post #11

Well if the suspect was wrongly accused, they'd have to reimburse the damages. Does the FBI have a budget for such things? Does it involve extra paperwork if it passes a certain threshold? Is the issue here profiling of the demographic or the risk ( in terms of cost ).

> Well if the suspect was wrongly accused, they'd have to reimburse the damages No, they wouldn't.

maybe it's a grammatical issue here, maybe it means if the subject was wrongly accused they (the subject) would have to reimburse the damages in which case, yeah that's how it works in real life.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#79

Post by analyst74 »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #68
slim wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's pointing out that people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich. Which I did not get even after reading it. I'm thankful he pointed it out

> people in the neighbourhood are politically influent, that's why they are treated that way, not because they are rich When (and where) is there a difference? What neighborhoods are there where rich people reside who have no more social or political influence than people living in The Projects?

An FBI director makes less than 200k, and will be very politically connected and influential; an engineer making that much probably has as much political influence as people living in the projects.

Money can buy political influence, but that's beyond the reach of lower echelon of wealthy.

Re: FBI Didn't Knock Down a Suspect's Door Because 'It Was an Affluent Neighborhood'

#80

Post by Cipater »

cbozeman wrote: post #40
alephnan wrote: post #11

Well if the suspect was wrongly accused, they'd have to reimburse the damages. Does the FBI have a budget for such things? Does it involve extra paperwork if it passes a certain threshold? Is the issue here profiling of the demographic or the risk ( in terms of cost ).

If the FBI is considering busting down your door, they do not have the wrong person.

I hope this is sarcasm.
Post reply on HN