Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

taskermorrisrider222 t1_itvdfmr wrote

>Without enforcement, Council’s laws are just words on paper.

This is the main problem with Philadelphia. It's so simple. We're going downhill because nobody wants to enforce anything, and those who do want to enforce the rules are not supported.

51

crispydukes t1_itwaa3n wrote

The PPD gets plenty of support

14

AbsentEmpire t1_itxy58x wrote

There's a lot more than just the stuff that falls under the PPD. Like building code enforcement, everything involving the streets department, parks and rec are pretty disfunction as well.

6

TheBSQ t1_itwht4u wrote

Some non-enforcement, like when it conflicts with state or federal law and creates legal liability, or when there’s legit resource constraints and enforcement needs prioritization, I am sympathetic to.

But it’s bullshit when it’s just a philosophical disagreement, like when people say it amounts to criminalizing poverty, or disproportionately affects some group negatively, or it only makes rehabilitation harder so it won’t be enforced.

That shit pisses me off. If that’s what you believe, then you gotta do the work to change the law.

The Pandora’s box that you open is that you can’t point to a bunch of laws and say, “Ignore these because I think they’re morally wrong” but then get mad when someone else ignores laws that you do want enforced.

It’s a very bad precedent once you open the door to the idea that enforcement is optional, arbitrary, and up to the discretion of whomever holds power.

4

Bruce_G t1_itwl8gp wrote

Every single prosecutor in the U.S. -- at every level, and in every jurisdiction -- makes policy choices about which crimes to prioritize. Zero exceptions.

If you don't like the policy choices of the current DA, you gotta work to elect a different one.

3

Ultimating_is_fun t1_itxfm6i wrote

I mean, broad enforcement just because the law exists is silly. There are some stupid fucking laws out there that shouldn't be enforced.

It's the why behind the lack of enforcement that bothers me. Don't enforce something important because offenders are disproportionately poor (i.e. black)? Nah, that's not good, usually there's victim(s) for every offense. When all you look at is the color of the skin of the offender you're ignoring the rights to not be victimized.

Even for something as simple as littering. If poor people are more likely to litter, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of us deserve to be able to live in a clean environment. The color of the person littering is completely irrelevant to the people in the neighborhood (again regardless of color), we just want it to stop. You can say the same for pretty much every nuisance in the city.

2