The system is only working if you view this as a detailed recording of every instance of harassment. That seems implausible, and the various citations seem to support the idea there is a lot more harassment happening.
Even if you do think this is all the harassment that has happened, the continued coverage means more harassment is likely. Next time the death threats may not be caught in time.
>Thats some strange logic. You have to weigh pros and cons.
Your argument was that "these incidents don't seem like that big of a deal." So in your fictional world where those three incidents are the only harassment that has happened, it's still a big deal as the system may fail the next time. In reality, there is already a mountain of harassment that the system failed to punish.
Much like speech, misuse of alcohol is already against the law. And people that have shown themselves to be unable to consume alcohol safely can find themselves stripped of various freedoms.
Your argument is all over the place. From "no harm is being done" to "the harm is limited and already being punished" and now "harmful behavior should be tolerated."
Even if you do think this is all the harassment that has happened, the continued coverage means more harassment is likely. Next time the death threats may not be caught in time.