pineapple wrote: > To help demonstrate how ludicrous Mr. Findley's > position is, consider this scenario. Imagine there is > a crack house on a street and opposite to the house > are apartment blocks. The drug dealers are committing > their crimes in full view of these apartments because > the residents do not report the illegal activity they > can see from their windows. Failing to report a crime > is a crime. It's practically a certainty that > someone(s) from the apartments witnessed the crimes > taking place outside the crack house. > > According to Mr. Findley's logic EVERYONE who had a > view to those illegal activities is a criminal!
This is becoming a common axiom in US law enforcement. The attempt to paint as many people guilty as possible, since any one of them potentially might blow up a school and kill children. Part of our new "Zero Tolerance" on Terrorism, so we can all be.. umm "Free" or something. > While it's obvious > that one or more (or even MOST) of the residents in > those apapartments did witness a crime and didn't > report it and so broke the law, Mr. Findley would have > everyone thrown in jail in order to punish the > perpetrators. Or perhaps Mr. Findley would decree > windows are illegal since they make it possible for > someone to witness a crime and not report it. Even better, because once in prison they're all billed out at the same rate to Nike, GAP, etc. to make clothing and whatever else consumerism demands. -- Jay Oliveri GnuPG ID: 0x5AA5DD54 FCPTools Maintainer www.sf.net/users/joliveri _______________________________________________ chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.general
