Strip qualified immunity from DA's. So if a DA refuses to prosecute a criminal, than said criminal goes out and commits another violent act, the DA can be sued civilly. Use civil courts to change behavior. The ACLU has done that for decades and changed the entire country for the worse in the proccess
To be honest, that seems like very, very small stuff, and while potentially (very?) good in itself (I have not considered or thought through it in depth), it seems like it would require much, much more than that. And without the proposals I wrote about... I don't know how much of a chance that road would work. The situation is different than some decades before, dramatically so in a number of very/extremely important regards, some for the (extreme) better, some for the (extreme) worse. That said, president Donald Trump is incredibly gifted, driven, caring, hard-working and capable (among other aspects), so if someone can help bring about such a road and make things work out well for everyone in practice at least a little bit, it seems like he would be the guy to do it. But at this point in time and the given situation, it seems incredibly difficult or impossible, even for miracle makers. Dealing with 13/50, BLM, Antifa, burning country, millions upon millions of illegal invaders, extremely corrupted and infiltrated systems (including various churches, evangelicals as well as the Catholic (anti-?)pope, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
It would work, none of these DA's would be letting criminals go wholesale if it would be their lives and assets on the line. The problem is that it would not be easy to remove that qualified immunity. The politicians who would need to pass the law, take advantage of it themselves.
You would also need to ensure that whom define what is lawful and what is not lawful is not corrupted or horrifyingly evil, or destroys systems from the inside-out, etc. etc. etc. For instance, what if the Democrats succeed in making child rape legal in the future? And so on and so forth.
But again, it seems like very, very small stuff, and much, much more than that seems to be required.
Strip qualified immunity from DA's. So if a DA refuses to prosecute a criminal, than said criminal goes out and commits another violent act, the DA can be sued civilly. Use civil courts to change behavior. The ACLU has done that for decades and changed the entire country for the worse in the proccess
To be honest, that seems like very, very small stuff, and while potentially (very?) good in itself (I have not considered or thought through it in depth), it seems like it would require much, much more than that. And without the proposals I wrote about... I don't know how much of a chance that road would work. The situation is different than some decades before, dramatically so in a number of very/extremely important regards, some for the (extreme) better, some for the (extreme) worse. That said, president Donald Trump is incredibly gifted, driven, caring, hard-working and capable (among other aspects), so if someone can help bring about such a road and make things work out well for everyone in practice at least a little bit, it seems like he would be the guy to do it. But at this point in time and the given situation, it seems incredibly difficult or impossible, even for miracle makers. Dealing with 13/50, BLM, Antifa, burning country, millions upon millions of illegal invaders, extremely corrupted and infiltrated systems (including various churches, evangelicals as well as the Catholic (anti-?)pope, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
It would work, none of these DA's would be letting criminals go wholesale if it would be their lives and assets on the line. The problem is that it would not be easy to remove that qualified immunity. The politicians who would need to pass the law, take advantage of it themselves.
You would also need to ensure that whom define what is lawful and what is not lawful is not corrupted or horrifyingly evil, or destroys systems from the inside-out, etc. etc. etc. For instance, what if the Democrats succeed in making child rape legal in the future? And so on and so forth.
But again, it seems like very, very small stuff, and much, much more than that seems to be required.