What's wrong with this question?

casualharbor9 said:Where am I even supposed to go to ask about police misconduct when someone's life or health is actually on the line because of some illegal procedure...

I don't know how else we can make this clear to you, but that’s really not what we're talking about here... 🤷

crimsonsailor7 said:How much more clearly can we explain that isn't what this is about? 🤷

... so please, enlighten me as to which part of this is incorrect:

1) It is illegal to garnish an individual's entire monthly income (wages, Social Security, disability benefits, etc.)

2) Depriving someone of their full monthly income puts their life and health at risk (unless food, water, housing, and everything else required for survival are just handed out for free? Or does a person typically manage to survive for 30 days without any of those things?!)

3) Endangering lives or property through reckless actions or means is a punishable offense under U.S. law.

Why are we even debating this in this section of the forum?

casualharbor9 said:... So why on earth are we debating this in this specific section of the forum?

It isn't a debate. You asked a question, you received an answer, and unfortunately, we can't really do much about the fact that the response didn't meet your expectations.🤷

If you're looking for a genuine discussion, I'd suggest heading over to the Legal subforum or perhaps the Economics section.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:In my personal opinion and based on how things work right now, no, a wage garnishment isn't a criminal offense. If you think otherwise, feel free to reach out to the Department of Justice, where you'll get a specific, well-substantiated answer that will—hopefully—satisfy you.👍

I never stated that collecting a debt is a crime; I said that taking an action that endangers someone's life—especially through illegal means—is a crime. I hope we can at least agree on that.
Personal opinions don't dictate whether something is legal or if it constitutes a crime, and if current practices are illegal, then they need to be changed.

The question I'm actually trying to pose concerns police procedure (we haven't even gotten to the Department of Justice yet): how does the Department of Homeland Security react when a documented case of endangering life and health is reported involving a government agency, a corporation, or individuals within them?
(And if they don't react—why?)

On the other hand, isn't it a potential crime that you and I went into debt knowing we wouldn't be able to pay it back? Doesn't that part worry you?😕

It doesn't worry me, because losing your job due to medical reasons—and subsequently being unable to meet a contractual obligation—isn't a crime.
What worries me is this legal and social system where individuals who live and work honestly their entire lives are pushed to the brink of existence due to someone else's guilt, arrogance, and negligence, while this so-called "rule of law" remains completely untouched... except for those who have the likes of Nobilo, Prodanović, or Hodak in their pockets. Those people aren't allowed to suffer even from fictitious mental anguish, even if, according to current practice, they are worse than Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan combined.

Brian Edwards6 said:We aren't debating here. You asked, and you were answered; we can't help you if the answer doesn't satisfy you.🤷

Of course the improvised justification of illegal and punishable actions doesn't satisfy me.
I haven't seen a single legal citation used as a counterargument. Which is understandable, given that this isn't the Law subforum.

If you want to have a real discussion, there are appropriate threads over in the Exactly and on the Economy subforum too.👍

... assuming those are actually topics meant for open discussion; thanks. Though I’m starting to suspect you guys just want me gone.

I mean, every time I click the :QUOTE: icon, I just get redirected to some landing page for Tempur-Pedic mattresses.😍