If you guessed "swift prosecution and the full weight of the justice system," congratulations — you understand how things work for most people. But if you're firefighter Eigil Qwist, apparently the answer is diversion.

Yes, diversion. The same kind of gentle, restorative-justice-flavored off-ramp that's supposed to be reserved for low-level offenses and first-time youthful mistakes. Allegedly assaulting a law enforcement officer in a crowded restaurant now qualifies, it seems — as long as you're wearing the right uniform.

Let's be clear: we respect firefighters. They run into burning buildings while the rest of us run out. That's heroic. But heroism in one context doesn't grant immunity in another. And when someone who wears a city badge gets kid-glove treatment for conduct that would land an average citizen in a holding cell, it doesn't just look like a two-tier justice system — it is one.

This is the kind of thing that corrodes public trust in institutions. San Francisco already has a credibility problem when it comes to holding people accountable — from open-air drug markets that operate with impunity to retail theft that goes unprosecuted. When the system then turns around and offers a sweetheart deal to someone who allegedly attacked a sheriff, the message is unmistakable: consequences are for the little people.

As one SF resident put it, it's a textbook example of the rules applying differently depending on who you are.

We're not asking for a firefighter to be railroaded. We're asking for equal treatment under the law — the exact thing the justice system is supposed to guarantee. If diversion is appropriate here, then the DA's office needs to explain why it isn't appropriate for everyone charged with similar conduct. And if they can't, they need to explain why some San Franciscans are more equal than others.

Accountability shouldn't come with a professional courtesy discount.