Not that I have any love for Bush's Justice Department, but he's not exactly wrong, right? I mean, I tend to think in this instance that crimes were committed somewhere along the line, but it's true that not every violation of the law is a crime.
Sure. One place this distinction has been a major issue is in immigration. While entering the country illegally is a federal crime, lacking legal status is a civil violation. This matters when local law enforcement officers decide that they want to start enforcing federal immigration law (which may very well be against the law in itself, but let's definitely not get into that *g*). Some law enforcement officers have used databases that include status-related offenses (e.g. overstaying a visa) as well as criminal offenses, which means that they may be detaining people based on the database without any evidence that they've actually committed a crime
( ... )
Fair enough, thanks! "Law" and "crime" are words that most of us use all the time and don't think of as unclear at all, but it's easy to forget that every profession has a specialist's vocabulary, too.
I bet he will in the future.
I would take that action. Not that I don't hope you're right, but I suspect you're wrong.
Comments 6
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I bet he will in the future.
I would take that action. Not that I don't hope you're right, but I suspect you're wrong.
Reply
Leave a comment