Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal • Hacker News Board

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#21

Post by numbsafari » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:47 PM UTC

fr0sty wrote: post #15

numbsafari wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 25 dead children who were completely innocent of any crime. It's an incident in a long line of incidents over many decades in which many innocent people were killed. I think you need to calibrate your moral barometer a bit better.

I'm not trying to equivocate. GGP commment made an unqualified statement "action in government is slow" adding that the idea of "drastic action" was a "fantasy". I countered by noting that in the present day the government is moving very fast on at least one particular issue. We will know tomorrow whether the action is drastic. Full stop.

Full stop?

How many mass murders has it taken to get to this point? How is that "drastic" or "very fast"? Oh, wait, there's a commission that might "recommend" we re-enact legislation that expired a few years ago? How is that "drastic"? How is that "very fast"?

As the GGP said, what's gonna happen first is an investigation and a review. Why the need to jump to "vigilante justice"?

The end result of "vigilante justice" is going to be more young people squandering their careers and futures, creating further justification for harsh sentencing and prosecution of "hacktivists", and probably just more work and demand for the very people they are trying to unseat.

Blowing this situation out of proportion and encouraging rash behavior is not going to solve the underlying problems.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#22

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:49 PM UTC

numbsafari wrote: post #7

fr0sty wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The main point is that action in government is slow. And for good reason. If people want to hold onto the fantasy that when a bunch of people get angry, the government will take drastic action...then fine... Sandy Hook was one month ago and the President is having a big news conference tomorrow about the administrations response re: gun violence. Is that "slow"? "drastic action"? something else?

It's 25 dead children who were completely innocent of any crime. It's an incident in a long line of incidents over many decades in which many innocent people were killed. I think you need to calibrate your moral barometer a bit better.

[deleted]

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#23

Post by gavinlynch » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:49 PM UTC

fr0sty wrote: post #15

numbsafari wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 25 dead children who were completely innocent of any crime. It's an incident in a long line of incidents over many decades in which many innocent people were killed. I think you need to calibrate your moral barometer a bit better.

I'm not trying to equivocate. GGP commment made an unqualified statement "action in government is slow" adding that the idea of "drastic action" was a "fantasy". I countered by noting that in the present day the government is moving very fast on at least one particular issue. We will know tomorrow whether the action is drastic. Full stop.

@ fr0sty:

I believe the point is that government action is almost always slow, perhaps with the Sandy Hook tragedy being one of the rare exceptions. Something has to captivate and horrify the nation as a whole to reach that level of outrage.

But beyond that, in these circumstances there is generally a known policy platform that proscribes a solution in terms of legislation and execution action.

Think about it. How long did it take the 9/11 Commission to come out? How long did it take us to learn the lessons of that tragedy and to attempt to implement measures to counter-act the causes and fine-tune or response. If ever there was a case for immediate action based on outrage, that was it.

In the case of Sandy Hook, the gun control measures by and large have been waiting in the wings. There have been packages applied on the state level all across the nation from which to draw a federal-level response. It was basically a case of "Okay, after this tragedy a large number of people have solidified which side of this debate they come down on. Let's ratify the gun control measures we have all discussed for decades now."

Is there such a wide-spread existing platform that would solve the alleged problems in the Aaron Shwartz case? Is there even a generally identified "problem" that a majority of people agree on? Do a majority of people agree that Aaron suicide was directly caused by the prosecution? I think many here have already made up their mind.

However I'm not so sure the beyond the tech communities there is a broad consensus or a clear case of causation. And if causation is not clear, how can we "fix" the problem, even if we had the nations rapt attention?

Finally, what is the package of changes waiting in the wings for us to ratify? Is there a commonly-held solution to the perceived proprietorial overreach? Is there something we all agree on that, assuming there is enough momentum to enact immediately, can be put into place? I'm no lawyer, but I imagine tinkering with the judicial system is not something that happens quickly.

Firing this prosecutor will just bring another who works within the same parameters of this system. Beyond the psychological satisfaction of "feel our rage" for angry people, what will it accomplish?

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#24

Post by npsimons » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:49 PM UTC

numbsafari wrote: post #12

danso wrote: post #4

> Overall, there is a feeling that Aaron Swartz’ death has to mark the beginning of a change. This petition could be a ticket and an opportunity for the administration to begin such a change, if nothing else, just by firing an overreaching prosecutor. That would be a symbolic action that would still send a message, albeit a weak one, but it would go a long way for many. In contrast, a nonaction from the administratio…

In Lawrence Lessig's essay titled "Prosecutor as Bully", he writes the following in his last paragraph: Somehow, we need to get beyond the "I'm right so I'm right to nuke you" ethics that dominates our time. If that's the case, threatening "vigilante justice" based on 25,000 signatures would seem to indicate those who want to see action against the prosecutors have failed to learn that lesson and are only interested…

Let's try to eliminate the equivocating, shall we? One the one hand, we have someone who was being threatened with being imprisoned for half his life, for doing something that couldn't have possibly merited that kind of retribution. On the other hand, we have a person being threatened with being removed from an position of power so that she (hopefully) can't abuse power over others again. She most likely will be able to get another job, and more importantly, won't have to live most of her life behind bars.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#25

Post by rolux » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:52 PM UTC

numbsafari wrote: post #12

danso wrote: post #4

> Overall, there is a feeling that Aaron Swartz’ death has to mark the beginning of a change. This petition could be a ticket and an opportunity for the administration to begin such a change, if nothing else, just by firing an overreaching prosecutor. That would be a symbolic action that would still send a message, albeit a weak one, but it would go a long way for many. In contrast, a nonaction from the administratio…

In Lawrence Lessig's essay titled "Prosecutor as Bully", he writes the following in his last paragraph: Somehow, we need to get beyond the "I'm right so I'm right to nuke you" ethics that dominates our time. If that's the case, threatening "vigilante justice" based on 25,000 signatures would seem to indicate those who want to see action against the prosecutors have failed to learn that lesson and are only interested…

Just a - friendly - reminder that the field that such ethics operate on isn't always symmetrical. At the other end of every "I'm right so I nuke you" you will find some "I'm right but they nuke me", and if you're looking for a rational explanation why rational people may consider "vigilante justice", you'll probably find it there.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#26

Post by numbsafari » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:52 PM UTC

olefoo wrote: post #20

numbsafari wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Lawrence Lessig's essay titled "Prosecutor as Bully", he writes the following in his last paragraph: Somehow, we need to get beyond the "I'm right so I'm right to nuke you" ethics that dominates our time. If that's the case, threatening "vigilante justice" based on 25,000 signatures would seem to indicate those who want to see action against the prosecutors have failed to learn that lesson and are only interested…

I would suggest that asking that someone be removed from a position of power that they are to all appearances misusing; is not vigilante justice. In point of fact, it is the proper procedure to ask that someone who has abused the public trust and shown a lack of judgment be removed from a position that requires trustworthiness and judgment. Vigilante justice would be hacking into her personal files and threatening he…

I agree with you.

My comment is not in response to the petition itself, but into the threats that are going around with respect to actual vigilante justice as described in the original article and by the original comment.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#27

Post by numbsafari » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:53 PM UTC

npsimons wrote: post #24

numbsafari wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Lawrence Lessig's essay titled "Prosecutor as Bully", he writes the following in his last paragraph: Somehow, we need to get beyond the "I'm right so I'm right to nuke you" ethics that dominates our time. If that's the case, threatening "vigilante justice" based on 25,000 signatures would seem to indicate those who want to see action against the prosecutors have failed to learn that lesson and are only interested…

Let's try to eliminate the equivocating, shall we? One the one hand, we have someone who was being threatened with being imprisoned for half his life, for doing something that couldn't have possibly merited that kind of retribution. On the other hand, we have a person being threatened with being removed from an position of power so that she (hopefully) can't abuse power over others again. She most likely will be able…

I'm not referring to her losing her job.

I'm referring to the threats of vigilante justice that seem to be going around, as mentioned by the linked article.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#28

Post by neltnerb » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:55 PM UTC

olefoo wrote: post #14

AnIrishDuck wrote: post #10

Am I the only one embarrassed by the blatant errors in that petition? The first sentence is a run-on grammatical non sequitor. The rest of the petition conveys a muddled thought process that seems blinded by outrage. Did the author even bother to proofread that thing before submitting it? There are plenty of other reasons to pass on this petition. That said, this displays less polish and thought than an email I typic…

As the author of the petition; I take responsibility for hitting the submit button, halfway through an edit. Sorry.

I forgive you. (No, seriously, this bugged me too, but it's the sentiment that counts)

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#29

Post by olefoo » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:56 PM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #18

danso wrote: post #4

> Overall, there is a feeling that Aaron Swartz’ death has to mark the beginning of a change. This petition could be a ticket and an opportunity for the administration to begin such a change, if nothing else, just by firing an overreaching prosecutor. That would be a symbolic action that would still send a message, albeit a weak one, but it would go a long way for many. In contrast, a nonaction from the administratio…

"There are actually steps that happen before the firing of an official, most notably an investigation." Actually, if she's a political appointee, she can be fired at any time. My recollection is the head prosecutors of each office are considered political appointees, but the assistant prosecutors are not. This has come up before. I could be completely wrong in this recollection, however :)

That is correct. Ms. Ortiz is a political appointee, she can be replaced at the discretion of the President.

The standard procedure is to ask the official to resign.

Re: Petition To Fire Aaron Swartz’ Prosecutor Reaches Goal

#30

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 6:56 PM UTC

DannyBee wrote: post #18

danso wrote: post #4

> Overall, there is a feeling that Aaron Swartz’ death has to mark the beginning of a change. This petition could be a ticket and an opportunity for the administration to begin such a change, if nothing else, just by firing an overreaching prosecutor. That would be a symbolic action that would still send a message, albeit a weak one, but it would go a long way for many. In contrast, a nonaction from the administratio…

"There are actually steps that happen before the firing of an official, most notably an investigation." Actually, if she's a political appointee, she can be fired at any time. My recollection is the head prosecutors of each office are considered political appointees, but the assistant prosecutors are not. This has come up before. I could be completely wrong in this recollection, however :)

[deleted]