<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>ptaipale</author><text>In fact many claim that harsher punishments don&amp;#x27;t work too well for &lt;i&gt;violent&lt;/i&gt; offences. Violent people don&amp;#x27;t think of consequences.&lt;p&gt;But for premeditated large-scale economic offences, they certainly work, because the punishment is part of the calculation that the criminal makes.</text><parent_chain><item><author>AnIdiotOnTheNet</author><text>Unless I&amp;#x27;m mistaken, the data suggests that harsher punishments do not work as a form of deterrent. It seems inappropriate to cage someone for a non-violent offence.</text></item><item><author>degenerate</author><text>Completely agree. These scum definitely need to go to jail, to send fair warning to would-be scammers that it&amp;#x27;s simply not worth the risk.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;The judgment was for $7.6 million, but it was partially suspended because of Brar&amp;#x27;s inability to pay the full amount, according to the FTC.&lt;p&gt;Pushover justice system, weak.</text></item><item><author>ra1n85</author><text>This judgement has no teeth:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Under the settlement, Brar — who operated Genius Technologies and Avangatee Services and does not admit or deny the allegations, according to court documents — “is permanently restrained and enjoined from advertising, marketing, promoting, or offering for sale, or assisting in the advertising, marketing, promoting, or offering for sale of Technical Support Services.”&lt;p&gt;This guy is being made to pay 136,000 despite:&lt;p&gt;“The cost to consumers ranged between several hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars,” the FTC said of the scam, which appeared to begin in 2015.&lt;p&gt;This is not justice, and this judgement does not serve as a deterrent.  This is grand larceny and needs to be accompanied with jail time for perpetrators.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Bay Area man must pay $136,000 in tech-support scam against elderly</title><url>https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/14/bay-area-businessman-must-pay-136000-in-tech-support-scam-against-elderly/</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>toss1</author><text>perhaps for a single non-violent offenses.&lt;p&gt;But for theft by deception practiced at scale?  Absolutely should be jailed for a significant amount of time.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d argue for significant amount of jail time simply for the waste and violations of law involved in needlessly ringing so many phones and violating Do Not Call laws.&lt;p&gt;these people create a real cost for society, and the penalty needs to be bigger than &amp;quot;oh, just give back some of your criminal gains&amp;quot;.  If you think that caging someone is inappropriate or doesn&amp;#x27;t work, you can go for lashing, or something else.  What would you actually suggest as a deterrent?</text><parent_chain><item><author>AnIdiotOnTheNet</author><text>Unless I&amp;#x27;m mistaken, the data suggests that harsher punishments do not work as a form of deterrent. It seems inappropriate to cage someone for a non-violent offence.</text></item><item><author>degenerate</author><text>Completely agree. These scum definitely need to go to jail, to send fair warning to would-be scammers that it&amp;#x27;s simply not worth the risk.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;The judgment was for $7.6 million, but it was partially suspended because of Brar&amp;#x27;s inability to pay the full amount, according to the FTC.&lt;p&gt;Pushover justice system, weak.</text></item><item><author>ra1n85</author><text>This judgement has no teeth:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt;Under the settlement, Brar — who operated Genius Technologies and Avangatee Services and does not admit or deny the allegations, according to court documents — “is permanently restrained and enjoined from advertising, marketing, promoting, or offering for sale, or assisting in the advertising, marketing, promoting, or offering for sale of Technical Support Services.”&lt;p&gt;This guy is being made to pay 136,000 despite:&lt;p&gt;“The cost to consumers ranged between several hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars,” the FTC said of the scam, which appeared to begin in 2015.&lt;p&gt;This is not justice, and this judgement does not serve as a deterrent.  This is grand larceny and needs to be accompanied with jail time for perpetrators.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Bay Area man must pay $136,000 in tech-support scam against elderly</title><url>https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/06/14/bay-area-businessman-must-pay-136000-in-tech-support-scam-against-elderly/</url></story>