<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>didibus</author><text>Sure, but if you look at all type work injury&amp;#x2F;mortality related issues, I doubt federal judge is at the top of the list. What could happen here though is that even though federal judges arn&amp;#x27;t at that great a risk in overall work related injury or harm, because they are a high authority high yielding power role they might have their risk addressed first and foremost, while others don&amp;#x27;t.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ahuth</author><text>I understand and sympathize with this view. But it seems likely that a federal judge is more likely to be a target of something like this. Mostly because of the nature of their work.</text></item><item><author>rjbwork</author><text>Totally agree.  Get everyone&amp;#x27;s details off the internet and you get those who are more equal than others&amp;#x27; off as well.  You shouldn&amp;#x27;t get special privileges because you work for the government.</text></item><item><author>giantg2</author><text>The only problem I have with this law is that it should protect everyone, not just first class citizens like judges and law enforcement. Other professions have disgruntled customers that wish to do people harm, especially other high-stakes professions such as doctors. The more we stratify society with special protections for specific classes of people, the more we drive a divide and feeling of disenfranchisement.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>My Son Was Killed Because I’m a Federal Judge</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/opinion/esther-salas-murder-federal-judges.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>_jal</author><text>&amp;gt; But it seems likely that a federal judge is more likely to be a target&lt;p&gt;More likely than...? It would really help understand what you&amp;#x27;re thinking if you&amp;#x27;d finish the sentence.&lt;p&gt;And I hope you aren&amp;#x27;t thinking &amp;quot;your average person&amp;quot;. If we passed a law to address median risk disparities in all the places we could, essentially everything that isn&amp;#x27;t mandatory would be forbidden.</text><parent_chain><item><author>ahuth</author><text>I understand and sympathize with this view. But it seems likely that a federal judge is more likely to be a target of something like this. Mostly because of the nature of their work.</text></item><item><author>rjbwork</author><text>Totally agree.  Get everyone&amp;#x27;s details off the internet and you get those who are more equal than others&amp;#x27; off as well.  You shouldn&amp;#x27;t get special privileges because you work for the government.</text></item><item><author>giantg2</author><text>The only problem I have with this law is that it should protect everyone, not just first class citizens like judges and law enforcement. Other professions have disgruntled customers that wish to do people harm, especially other high-stakes professions such as doctors. The more we stratify society with special protections for specific classes of people, the more we drive a divide and feeling of disenfranchisement.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>My Son Was Killed Because I’m a Federal Judge</title><url>https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/opinion/esther-salas-murder-federal-judges.html</url></story>