>>>OK, I got it, go to a wedding and line them all up, demanding to see their faces in profile, to see if it's racial or not. Arrest only those who object. Do it equal opportunity - from the shantytowns to the posh weddings in larger hotels, so nobody feels left out.
>>>
>>>I actually agree with you: he goes where the criminals are and acts. That is, he goes where the poorer criminals who can't pay larger caliber lawyers are and acts like he owns them, thus venting his frustration that he can never get to the richer criminals.
>>
>>Do you have a point or just some sort of argument?
>>
>>He should go after criminals or not?
>
>So that's the only choice, yes or no? I'll take the or, then.

OK. that's what I thought. Arguing for the sake of arguing isn't my style.

>
>Seeing what Victor has posted, and having some mental image of that kind of guys, the very idea of raiding a wedding is enough for me to seriously dislike the guy, point or no point. And my question is whether he'd go against all kinds of crime with the same fervor, or would he stick with his preferences, harassing the poor, the not exactly white, and generally those who fit his prejudice (aka profile), while avoiding the rich, the corporate thugs, the clergy etc in a wide arc.