Although having the leaker's name can increase credibility a little bit, it is ultimately the correctness of the information that matters. People believe Wikileak's documents because large portions have been verified; having whistleblower names attached to the leaked information wouldn't increase significantly increase the credibility of the docs.

I'm probably gonna get a -1 flamebait for this, but I'll counter this point anyways. There is no need to have a government, if its sole function is to uphold the rules of the majority. If the Fed didn't exist, people would still agree that, say, stealing is bad; we don't need a government to affirm this conviction. But I do agree with you: we do have a federal government that imposes (better word) the will of the majority on everyone. E.G. if most people don't like drugs, hey, "we should ban them!" "Don't like gays? Hey, make their marriages illegal!" I think that's a better way to look at it.

It's not a waste if they sell it o.O

The police would answer that the arrest provides an example for future teens who want to publish demeaning content about their peers. But what makes you think that the police are interested in benefiting society? Fundamentally, they want more cases like this so they can justify their continued existence, and keep coercing more tax dollars.

Actually, it does. Free speech must not be restricted unless it presents a "clear and present danger [to others]." The founding fathers knew that democracies function only when people have a right to criticize freely. This means that governments cannot eliminate speech simply because the masses find it undesirable. For instance: what if, in the early 19th century, all talk about freeing the slaves were made illegal because most considered it an undesirable and offensive idea? We would still have slaves! Thus, all speech (even racist or sexist slurs) must be protected. Although I find the 17-year-old's content repulsive, he absolutely does have a right to free speech.

Fundamentally, the problem is that the States maintain transportation infrastructure. Although they succeed (somewhat) at repairing the roads, State governments have the same problems as all governmental institutions; namely, inefficiency and lack of accountability. Private organizations, by contrast, do not suffer from these issues.

Before the 1950s, almost all roads were handled by private companies. They used a number of business models to profit; for instance, they established tolls (toll roads) to fund themselves. Instead of obtaining money through mandatory gas taxes or tax by mile systems, the organizations created systems that were voluntary, simple, and non-coercive: three qualities that the current and proposed governmental solutions do not have.

Don't worry, the Muskegon County Prosecutor has got you covered! He's already found one of those pesky child molesters, no wiretap required.