3 ms·
This is not really about encryption or terrorism. In England and Wales teaching someone a skill is not normally illegal, but teaching someone a skill for the p
by brassic 10y ago
This is not really about encryption or terrorism.
In England and Wales teaching someone a skill is not normally illegal, but teaching someone a skill for the purpose of committing a criminal offence may well be aiding and abetting.
Terrorist offences (as woolly as they are) attract additional penalties but the general principle is nothing new.
- contravariant 10y agoMy knowledge of UK law is limited, but what strikes me as odd is that he's facing additional punishment for several actions that aren't themselves malicious. It's not just a single charge for aiding in a terrorist attack, but a whole range of separate charges (with heavy punishments) for possibly related but otherwise completely innocent actions.
- x0x0 10y agoBut those other actions only appear to be a crime if meant to aid terrorism. Or am I wrong? see eg CA: possession of lockpicks is legal. If you have criminal intent, which must be proven, possession is a felony.
- contravariant 10y agoI don't really think that particular law makes any more sense. If an act is only a crime when used to prepare for a more serious crime, then the crime should be 'preparing <serious crime>' not the preparatory act. If an act can be shown to be preparation for a more serious act then the person should be punished for preparing the more serious crime (which usually has a maximal punishment equal to actually committing the crime), if there isn't enough evidence to show that the preparatory acts shouldn't be punishable either. It really seems like a way to try to convict someone with shoddy evidence, or some roundabout way of trying to get around double jeopardy, or perhaps to criminalize intent, rather than acts.