In the recent HN discussion about whether the Department of Homeland Security should be abolished...some commenters wondered why that would be any improvement compared to moving its components into other existing Departments...bureaucratic details aside, I think one thing that DHS has going against it is its paramilitary nature that is not quite military, not quite FBI, and sometimes literally, just some guy with a badge feeling you up at the airport...and that is why some people think it's more reasonable to just do away with the DHS, even if its components are preserved (and keep the same authority and deadly force to enforce laws and security)
It's that lack of "real" authority that makes DHS seem less desirable than its parts being moved into "real" departments.
In other words...think of your reaction when a police officer has a gun in your face telling you to place your hands slowly where he can see them...and a mall cop who is bellowing at you to put your hands in the air "or else". The former situation is materially less pleasant, but you may psychologically be OK with it because "the cop is doing his job and cops put their lives on the line, and also, he has the power of the Law behind him, and, Law & Order is a great show"...whereas with the mall cop, your life is never in danger and yet you have contempt with someone trying to assert authority in his small pathetic world.
With DHS (in some people's opinion), and seemingly, these Chinese rule enforcers, you could have the worst of both worlds...a poorly trained government official who oversteps his very limited authority and yet has the ability to ruin your life, legally.
> “This is in fact a metaphor for today’s China, where the state is seizing property everywhere through a variety of means,” Mr. Li wrote. “Businessmen lose their enterprises and are thrown into prison; an anonymous vendor loses his watermelons. Sometimes it’s the urban management officers that seize the property. Sometimes it’s the court, or the bank, or the unpredictable policies.”
Fairly sure that the US have fairly low level of low level corruption and high level of political corruptions. If you offer a bribe to a police officer in the US, I am sure that 90% of the time, they would just haul you to jail.
The fact that insane prosecutions against people is occuring is probably a result of our democratic institution's perverse incentives("TOUGH ON CRIME", "3 STRIKES LAW", "THINK OF THE CHILDREN") and lack of forethought and rationality on the part of the electorate.
I will grant that you could apply the statement, with a little stretching, to the US because the offenses are not quantified. But I don't think the actual situations are that similar.
It's that lack of "real" authority that makes DHS seem less desirable than its parts being moved into "real" departments.
In other words...think of your reaction when a police officer has a gun in your face telling you to place your hands slowly where he can see them...and a mall cop who is bellowing at you to put your hands in the air "or else". The former situation is materially less pleasant, but you may psychologically be OK with it because "the cop is doing his job and cops put their lives on the line, and also, he has the power of the Law behind him, and, Law & Order is a great show"...whereas with the mall cop, your life is never in danger and yet you have contempt with someone trying to assert authority in his small pathetic world.
With DHS (in some people's opinion), and seemingly, these Chinese rule enforcers, you could have the worst of both worlds...a poorly trained government official who oversteps his very limited authority and yet has the ability to ruin your life, legally.