upvote
I’m glad that people who share your point of view do not have power in the United States.
reply
People who believe in justice and democracy, or what? We need to hold people accountable for their crimes. Fines and other slaps on the wrist let big tobacco, big ultraprocessed food, and now big gambling to take advantage. What would you do? Wait for the courts? Wait for the corrupt legislature?
reply
Read about the "rule of law," one of the foundational concepts of the US and basically any democracy, as well as most successful monarchies and other forms of government.

Yes, we wait for the courts or the legislature rather than resorting to mob justice. There are good reasons for it. The most obvious is to ensure that the corrupt politicians do not use the power of the state to arbitrarily oppress and persecute people. Another is to ensure that there is no doubt about guilt when we convict someone, and to avoid arguments about the penalties being arbitrary and unfair.

Really though, establishing courts to deal with accusations of people breaking the law is something most societies converge on at some point. "Joe was only ordered to spend 5 years working the fields, so why should Jim be executed for doing the same thing????" amounts to a rudimentary form of judicial law -- pointing to a precedent from a previous case to argue the current case.

reply
> Wait for the courts?

Yes. This is what we do in the United States and most of Western Europe. This is how countries like this function

reply
I would rather we have plain language legislation than playing this dumb waiting game of "well, I felt like interpreting these 20 laws and 16 cases this way today, and my successors will overturn this with the flick of a pen". It doesnt help that our legislature, and even many of our jurists, are bought out ever since the Citizens United decision.
reply
You're missing the point. Popular outrage and a crime are not the same thing.

Until a judge says it's a crime, it isn't. Innocent until proven guilty etc

reply
What is a democracy if not a reflection of the populace? Obviously there'd be trials, the constitution says as much.
reply