5 ms·
Well, he's a bad judge then. He should be able to adapt to the situation rather than follow the law literally
by env123 7y ago
Well, he's a bad judge then. He should be able to adapt to the situation rather than follow the law literally
- dagw 7y agoIt's an interesting philosophical question if nothing else. If a law is unclear, to what extent should a judge be deciding what the law “should" say vs. going with what's on the page and telling the lawmakers that they need to clarify their intentions.
- cr0sh 7y agoI guess it's ultimately what - if anything - the law in question (or whatever it may reference) defines a "computer" as (legally). Maybe the definition on the books says a computer is a device with a screen and a keyboard, and maybe other input/output devices like a printer or a mouse. Maybe it says something about typing on a computer, or sitting down at a computer, or such? It probably doesn't do anything like reference what the technical definition of a computer is (and funnily enough, if it did - even that would likely be wrong, and exclude things like analog computers, relay machines, mechanical differential analyzers, and a whole host of other things which historically and otherwise are "computers").