Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If the police have to provide protection to anyone whose doorbell has been rung, then they're going to be very, very, very busy.


This is not the reasoning (which I am criticizing) for not protecting them given here and at any rate there are more reasons to think people might wish him harm at this time.


Is this comment deliberately facetious?


Nothing facetious about my comment at all.

Many people in Korea have faced far worse threats than having their doorbell rung without getting personal police protection. If this is indeed the new standard for getting police protection, the Seoul police force needs to start a huge recruitment drive.


[flagged]


It's not a false equivalence at all. If anything, it's surprising that there is even a discussion that he needs police protection.


It's almost as if there was a much greater context that you deliberately ignored.

It's not the "bell ringing" part that's worrying it's the "people lost tons of money and potentially seek revenge" part


Let's focus on what's actually happening instead of hypothetical threats.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: