• I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    But that’s the thing, there is literally zero evidence that policy helps “prevent child trafficking”. They don’t release any data about it.

    So we have citizens essentially spying and reporting on other citizens under some vague “for the children” excuse and people who can’t spell the word nuance, let alone know what it means, saying “well if its for the children, how can it possibly be bad!?”

    It’s like pointing out how every part of the TSA is just security theater and having mouthbreathers say “nuh-uh it’s to stop terrorism”.

    • SamboT@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Similar to anti-money laundering regulations, the data and strategies might not be released to prevent traffickers from making data-driven decisions to avoid getting caught.

      Reporting suspicious persons was done by an employee who has a responsibility to do so. Even if it were a patron, I can’t think of a more fair system than to be judged by my peers.

      I would ask you what you think the intent of the employee was. Do you think they were trying to ruin the day of someone with a mixed race child? Do you think they really thought it could be a trafficking situation?

      Yes, it’s fair to judge a policy that can offend people. But a policy that saves people from literal enslavement at the cost of potential hurt feelings is a trade off I would make every day of the week. Which is why I’m glad policy and strategy come from professionals and not you.