There's something called "blind leading the blind". And there's a saying "the law is blind". Go figure. Today I'll tell you the story of law, of how the blind leads the blind, and the few who can see it never question it.

What's so wrong with law, you might say. It protects us from thieves and murderers and all sorts of trouble-makers. Well, it at least makes them accountable for it, and doesn't allow society to fall apart. It executes justice. But, I ask you, my dear law-abiding citizen, is law the same as justice? Can you truthfully say to me, that the law, in absolutely every case, has executed justice?

No, you definitely can't. The law is blind, it doesn't care about where you have come from or why you have done whatever you did, it doesn't care that you broke the traffic signal to rush to the hospital when the ambulance would have took another hour to arrive, it doesn't care that you killed the cruel rich man who broke thousands of labor laws and exploited miners but left no evidence and that you wanted to become Robin Hood, it doesn't care that you had stolen that bread because you were starving, or robbed that bank, without making even a dent in their profits, to be able to afford that surgery for your mother. The law doesn't care about motives.

And even if it did, would law still be the same as justice? No, it wouldn't, for the law doesn't even care about what is right or wrong. The law is the law, which no citizen can challenge easily. And the law doesn't care about executing justice at all, all it cares about is evidence. 

Now, tell me, which criminal in their right mind would aim to leave evidence for your law to track them down and convict them? No one, unless they are so poor that jail would be a better place for them, which is not as impossible as you think. But coming back to the matter at hand, is it not possible for a crime to be simply too bare to have enough evidence for conviction? Of course it is. There is no perfect crime, I admit, but then there is not a perfect execution of law either. And of course, what better way to evade the law than to break another one?

Corruption, once it digs its slimy hands into the system, makes it absolutely incapable of operating at its former level once again. When police men are paid lesser than clerks despite working for twice as many hours and even at holidays, and are less feared and much more hated by every citizen who imagines what law has he unknowingly broken if a policeman calls him, and the law enforcer has to await for evidence to take action, even if it threatens his or other's lives; in such an environment how would one expect him to work with full honesty and dedication at his duty, and even when the department itself would turn against him should he act out of protocol? In some ways, policemen have been reduced to evidence-collecting robots, who can execute neither law nor justice without breaking the law, and hence are blamed for it either way. If he acts without evidence, the policeman may lose his job or possibly even have the law after him, if he waits for evidence, then he loses his sense of duty with each passing day, and is at the receiving end of hatred from the affected citizens, and even from his own department for the lack of results.

So, what do I propose, instead of the law? If I had a better, foolproof system, I would have been in the parliament rather than complaining here. Perhaps we could make it less evidence based, but then judges could easily convict the innocent as well. Motives are a subjective matter to judge upon. There are people who still believe Robin Hood was a robber and should be considered a criminal, whereas stealing from the very rich and giving to the very poor could only be the act of a legend. What is there to do, but to hate the law as well then? And thus, I spread my hatred everywhere. 

On a passing note, a system like judge Dredd could work well, in which the police act as the judge and jury as well, with a camera feed for accountability. It would require lesser hiring for the government too. Yes, perhaps it is only with such power that justice can be executed, swiftly and effectively, once again. Too bad the law is so bureaucratic that making it better, legally, is a time-taking process. So, that means one has to go through a lot of bureaucracy in order to make the law less bureaucratic. Now, ain't that ironic?

Note: This isn't about the American police, apparently you guys are OP there