Article View: comp.society.privacy
Article #261Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
From: Mitch Collinsworth
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:36
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:36
24 lines
1603 bytes
1603 bytes
In <comp-privacy1.116.1@pica.army.mil> rj@cadre.com (Rob deFriesse) writes: >While it is illegal to ban any reciever, the law also states that it >is illegal to use a reciever in the commision of a crime. This is >how they justify the prohibition of radar dectectors. >The problem I have with this is that a radar detector prohibition >assumes that a crime has or will be commited even though there >may be no proof of the crime. The counter argument is that a radar >detector is good for only one thing: to facilitate the violation >of speed limits. This is not good enough. The law is clear. >Receivers are always legal unless used to commit a crime. OK, I'm with you this far, but then you add: >If >there is no proof of a crime, there is no crime. Oops, now you've gone too far. If I murder your sister and you have no proof, I've still committed a crime. Not getting caught doesn't make me innocent. -Mitch Collinsworth mitch@graphics.cornell.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<comp-privacy1.118.3@pica.army.mil>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ukma!computer-privacy-requestShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ukma!computer-privacy-request Date: 23 Dec 1992 15:36:22 -0500 From: Mitch Collinsworth <mkc@graphics.cornell.edu> Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions Message-ID: <comp-privacy1.118.3@pica.army.mil> Organization: Cornell University Program of Computer Graphics Sender: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil Approved: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 118, Message 3 of 9 Lines: 26