6 ms·
Three Felonies a Day (2013)
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ashton314 1y agoI would love some examples for other occupations.
- AyyEye 1y agoIf you have ever bought, sold, transported, held, or been alone in a room with a Gibson guitar you have been in violation of the Lacey Act.
- ralusek 1y ago> If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide Ok but in not hiding anything, we all apparently do a lot "wrong."
- rad_gruchalski 1y ago“Only those who do nothing make no mistakes”.
- johnisgood 1y agoInaction can be a mistake, too. :P
- Toorkit 1y agoAbsolutely. I have a flawless record.
- ericyd 1y agoFor such a short book review I feel like they could have listed out one or two example felonies that people likely commit each day. Feels like a weird tease.
- armada651 1y agoAccording to this review the book never backs up its claim: https://www.econlib.org/three-felonies-a-day/ https://www.econlib.org/three-felonies-a-day/
- fny 1y agoAt the same time, that review concedes he “would bet the number is more like three felonies a month.” That seems sufficient for abuse.
- nativeit 1y agoI don't know that it was intended to assert or enumerate that as a literal statement? Seems like it was only trying to suggest that our code of laws is such that any individual could be targeted, and it's plausible that they could be found in violation of some statute given sufficient motivation on the part of investigators. This strikes me as intuitively true, and tracks with other signals such as the impact of "Broken Windows Policing"[1], the recent application of Justice Department investigations as political retribution, the ongoing phenomena of false confessions[2], the statistics involved with erroneous convictions[3], etc.. That's a charitable reading of the title and the author's intentions. I don't know that their underlying point is even possible to quantify, but in my opinion that doesn't detract from its basic assertion that no one should feel out-of-reach from the kind of motivated prosecution they describe in the one highlighted example. I also ran across another comment under one of the more critical reviews of the book, and I found it relevant (as did the author of the critical review, in their reply)[4]: > Also, I think the book also makes an important point implicitly on ‘rule of law’ arguments as they relate to public policy. It’s common for people to argue, for example, that regardless of the merits of illegal immigration or economic regulations, their violators deserve to be punished simply because, “it’s the law.” We can’t just let the law go unenforced. Except the law (often very trivial laws) goes selectively unenforced – and selectively enforced – all the time, as illustrated in Silverglate’s book. It’s already a foregone conclusion that we pick in choose how many resources (if any at all) to devote to enforcing a particular crime, usually depending on how severe it’s considered by most people. -- 1. https://www.simplypsychology.org/broken-windows-theory.html https://www.simplypsychology.org/broken-windows-theory.html 2. https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/false-confessions https://www.apa.org/news/podcasts/speaking-of-psychology/fal... 3. https://innocenceproject.org/exonerations-data/ https://innocenceproject.org/exonerations-data/ 4. https://www.econlib.org/three-felonies-a-day/ https://www.econlib.org/three-felonies-a-day/ Edit: formatting
- metadat 1y agoDiscussed previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5860250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5860250 - 169 comments (June 2013)
- zellyn 1y ago“If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.”
- xyst 1y agoThe "case study" [1] in the author’s post is unsubstantiated. The author of the "case study" (it’s a short e-mail depicting a conviction of a C-level executive) even tries to parallel it with Aaron Schwartz conviction which is disgusting to me. The C-level executive and his lackeys were committing _insider trading_ and profited from it. You getting caught with your pants down is not government overreach, it’s blatant greed. This does not have any similarity to Aaron Schwartz wrongful conviction. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20130614024309/https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/2013-June/008815.html https://web.archive.org/web/20130614024309/https://mailman.s...
- Asooka 1y agoBut that's the point - he wasn't doing anything that other CEOs weren't doing too, except he got targeted by the government and was imprisoned for six years.
- ecb_penguin 1y ago> But that's the point - he wasn't doing anything that other CEOs weren't doing too 1. Millions of business executives go their entire life without insider trading 2. Lots of people commit crimes and are not caught. It doesn't mean you're excused when you are caught.
- deknos 1y ago> 1. Millions of business executives go their entire life without insider trading Citation needed. At some point at some position you will be ALWAYS vulnerable. that's for the people at the top and at the bottom. both are very vulnerable. the people at the top have MUCH to loose. the people at the bottom can be stopped to have anything to loose and still be tortured.
- ecb_penguin 1y ago> Citation needed That's not how things work.... It's also a weird way to have a conversation or discussion. I can't prove a negative that millions of people didn't do something. > At some point at some position you will be ALWAYS vulnerable. It costs $50 to become a CEO. It does not make you vulnerable nor likely to commit federal crimes.
- metaphor 1y agoThe complaint[1] by the SEC against Qwest during the dot-com bubble...you decide if Nacchio serving "a trumped-up 6-year federal prison sentence" was appropriate. [1] https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/comp18936.pdf https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/comp18936.pd...
- capitainenemo 1y agoThe case against Nacchio is a different one.
- prmph 1y ago1. Speeding over the speed limit can be a crime. I haven't ever driven in the US and not noticed that pretty much everyone around me is over-speeding 2. Failing to pay tax on certain gifts can be a crime > You make a gift if you give property (including money), or the use of or income from property, without expecting to receive something of at least equal value in return. If you sell something at less than its full value or if you make an interest-free or reduced-interest loan, you may be making a gift. [1] 3. If you are reading Hacker News on end instead of working for your employers who pays you, you could be stealing from them, a felony. 4. Jay-walking can a misdemeanor, and open to interpretation. Commit 3 misdemeanors and you could have committed a felony. 5. More examples come to mind [1] https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/gift-tax https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...
- atian 1y agoThere is a huge lifetime gift tax exemption.
- nashashmi 1y agoTraffic rules are not criminal laws. Breaking a traffic rule is not a crime. Likewise, reading news at work is not a felony, just a lack of discipline and work ethic. Understand that there are differences between rules, policy, regulations, and laws. Work is regulated (rule is on how to do things), policy is practiced (rule on how things are treated), while laws forbid (rule on what you cannot do).
- rayiner 1y agoIn many states, such as Maryland, traffic laws are criminal laws and breaking a traffic law is a misdemeanor criminal offense.
- prmph 1y ago> Breaking a traffic rule is not a crime. You think over speeding and running a red light and hitting someone and potentially killing them is not a crime? Think again. Regarding reading at work, see this comment [1]: > checking Hacker News from work when you should be working is a federal felony, and if not honest services fraud, certainly something they could try you with for wire fraud (it is financial in that you are billing your employer for your time!). Moreover if you check a site for non-work purposes which has a note in the ToS which says that unlawful use is prohibited, then you have committed felony computer trespass (because you "accessed" their servers in excess of authorization provided by the ToS in pursuit of criminal or tortuous ends). [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5860641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5860641
- croes 1y agoLand of the free
- mnky9800n 1y agoWhoever told you that is your enemy
- djha-skin 1y agoIt should be remembered that in 2013 all the Edward Snowden stuff came out. This reads like a reaction to those revelations. Read in that context, it makes more sense: this is less a book review and more an accusation. Its portent is that the NSA will do anything it needs to to get at your data. My father served in the military. He does not have a high opinion of Edward Snowden. He says that loose lips sink ships. He says that these kinds of leaks cause soldiers to die. I have no patience for men who cause soldiers to die, but after that experience I do remain skeptical of the NSA and NIST.
- Mistletoe 1y agoWhat did the soldiers fighting in the wars die for if the government becomes a totalitarian surveillance cesspool anyway? The sacrifice means nothing if we become what they were fighting.
- GoblinSlayer 1y agoSoldiers fighting totalitarian surveillance cesspool would be like state fighting itself.
- snypher 1y ago>I have no patience for men who cause soldiers to die I'll remember this when I next think of when we spent twenty years sending our kids to die in the sandbox.
- robocat 1y agoYou are responding with a grey comment to a black & white statement (metaphorically). Different thinking styles.
- djha-skin 1y agoI understand your statement and it has merit. However, I note the draft has not been active since the 70s. Those men all volunteered to serve their country. They believed in what they were doing, and so did I. Yes, some volunteered to get out of poverty, bad circumstances, etc., but that doesn't mean it was the only route out. They chose to be there. My uncle was in a bad situation, married early and had no money or degree. He joined the army and served in Desert Storm. He chose to be there. I was proud of him. I didn't join because at the time I graduated high school (2005), they weren't taking people who took Adderall for ADHD ("daily psycoactive drug" or some such nonsense). It disqualified me from military service. That's what the recruiter told me anyway. But I would have been proud to serve. I believe we did good in Afghanistan, fool's errand though it was. I believe a lot of lives were touched good. An entire generation of girls who would otherwise not have an education, for one. I was devastated when things didn't work out. For this reason, I get annoyed when people say "we sent our kids to die".
- bartread 1y agoI can sort of buy it but, honestly, this argument would be a lot more convincing with more concrete examples that are relateable to ordinary people. Some CEO getting busted for insider trading is not "ordinary people". There's nothing in there that backs up this assertion: "The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day." Like I say, I could buy it, but I need more concrete evidence - with examples - and less hyperbole, please.
- hermannj314 1y agoI asked if I could pay cash for an MRI rather than wait for insurance approval just to speed up the process of booking. I offered to manually file a reimbursement later if it was approved or pay cash if it wasn't. Apparently, in the United States that is considered insurance fraud or something, whereas when I lived in Luxembourg that is how the system worked. I don't even understand what world we have constructed in the US.
- jagged-chisel 1y agoKeep in mind that the facility is likely making an error. But you won’t convince them of that if any of the staff suspects anything could be perceived as fraudulent (even if it’s not) - they’ll just avoid the risk.
- _dark_matter_ 1y agoIdk what happened on their end, but someone close to me was recently diagnosed with cancer. After the biopsy came out positive, they wanted to do a pet scan, but had to wait for approval from insurance (which apparently could take several weeks). I offered the same as you, and they agreed and did the pet scan within days.
- wrs 1y agoThat sounds like it might be the staff just being uninformed because nobody has ever wanted to do that before. But a likely practical problem with that plan is that the cash price is unrelated to the price the insurance company has negotiated with the facility, and the negotiated price is a secret, so if you pay the cash price you won’t be reimbursed for the amount you paid. You’d need to get them to agree to refund the difference if insurance approved later. For imaging in particular, there are some facilities that can handle direct payment rather than expecting everything to be paid by insurance. Maybe look for one of those if this comes up again. Yes, this is very messed up. Welcome to the USA!
- gizmo686 1y agoAre the negotiated prices secret? I've never had a major hospital visit. But every time insurance has covered something for me, I could look on my account claims and see both the official price, and the negotiated price. I also had an "amusing" experience with my dental insurance, where my provider went out of network, and I didn't know until I was in the chair (at which point I was at least asked before they proceeded). When I went to pay, they gave me a bill that listed only something to the effect of "anticipated insurance payment", which is what I was charged. They also filed an insurance claim on my behalf, which was eventually reimbursed fully. However, when I got the reimbursement notice from my insurer, it list a cash price about 50% higher than what I paid, which my insurance company was able to negotiate down for me.
- thrpdfmkr 1y ago[flagged]
- fastaguy88 1y agoNot a lawyer, but there are a lot of crimes that are not felonies. Speeding 10 mph above the limit in a 65 mph zone - not a felony. Reading hacker news for an hour during work time and not being paid $800/hr - not a felony. Calling in sick when you are hung over - not a felony. There is no federal tax on gifts for the giftee. Indeed, I suspect there are a surprising number of crimes that could get you jail time that are not felonies. Insider trading - it’s a felony, which is why people in companies with insider trading information are told they cannot trade at certain times. I’m pretty comfortable believing I have probably not committed more than two or three felonies in my life. (Don’t want to find out I am wrong.)
- titanomachy 1y agoThose are not crimes either, though.
- gruez 1y agoThe claim is specifically three "felonies" a day, though.
- everforward 1y agoHow much of that is them being categorically not a felony and how much is prosecutorial discretion? 15 over probably qualifies for a reckless operation charge of some kind. Likewise, I wouldn’t be surprised if a fake sick day is wire fraud even if it never actually gets charged that way. I would believe you’ve only committed two or three “name-brand” felonies, I’d be surprised if it were really that few under a maximally scoped prosecutor. Never borrowed antibiotics or a painkiller from a friend? Never decided it wasn’t worth the effort to file a tax document for $3 of dividends? 3 a day feels high, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it were double digits a year under an incredibly strict reading of the laws for the average person.
- 1970-01-01 1y agoParallel construction seems to be the more leveraged government tool these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- antiquark 1y agoReminded me of the youtube vid, "Don't Talk to the Police" [1]. One of the speaker's points is that there are so many laws that people might not know which law they broke. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE
- kazinator 1y agoThere is a Russian adage about it. Evidently this: "Был бы человек, а статья найдется" (Byl by chelovyek, a statya naydyot sa.) "Where there is a man, there is an article" (of law he's breaking that could be used to convict him).
- mnky9800n 1y agoI am American who studied Russian for two years now. Maybe I don’t know anything but I would translate человек as “person” not “man” as I don’t think that it’s masculine gendered word implies it’s man since anyone is человек. But again I could be wrong and I am still learning so feel free to explain why I’m wrong.
- petermcneeley 1y agoсмотри сюда https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_the_man_and_I_will_give_you_the_case_against_him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_the_man_and_I_will_giv...
- mnky9800n 1y agoСпасибо. Очень интересно.
- kazinator 1y agoClassic proverbs in English do not use "person". They use "man". "man" is the word that was used for "person" well into the 20th century, before political correctness took over speech and writing. For instance, the opening narrative for the original Star Trek TV sci-fi series starring William Shattner and Leonard Nimoy uses the words "to boldly go where no man has gone before". If I were to make a literal translation, it would require the word "find" used in a reflexive/passive tense something like "given a person, an article can be found". I made the translation fit a proverbial pattern, similar "where there is smoke, there is fire". Also note that "chelovyek", though not denoting a male, is still a masculine word! A chlovyek's pronouns are "he/him". The cognate of that word in other Slavic languages, likewise masculine. There are also precedents, like the title of Alexandr Men's book Syn Chelovecheskiy being translated to English as Son of Man.
- wcfrobert 1y ago- Not reporting large cash transactions (over $10,000) - Using someone else's ID can be interpreted as identity theft (sharing student ID discount, Costco cards, epic passes) - torrenting copyrighted content (textbooks, music, movies, TV shows, audio books). I'm sure most of my classmates in school torrented some of those $200 textbooks.
- gruez 1y ago>- Not reporting large cash transactions (over $10,000) If you're talking about Currency Transaction Report, only financial institutions have to file those. >- Using someone else's ID can be interpreted as identity theft (sharing student ID discount, Costco cards, epic passes) Is "identity theft" actually a distinct crime? Or is it just fraud? If it's the latter, it's not a felony unless you're getting absurdly high amounts of benefit. >- torrenting copyrighted content (textbooks, music, movies, TV shows, audio books). I'm sure most if not all of my classmates in school torrented some of those $200 textbooks. Copyright infringement is a civil infraction unless you're doing it commercially (eg. burning bootleg DVDs to sell)
- wcfrobert 1y agoI was thinking form 8300. Could seeding a torrent be interpreted as distribution? You're right most of these would result in a slap on the wrist or fines. Perhaps 3 misdemeanors a day? But I think the overall sentiment still stands - that it's hard to be a saint.
- gruez 1y ago>I was thinking form 8300. It's only criminal for "willful" infractions. If you sold a car and forgot to file, that's probably not willful. Moreover, how often are people really doing >$10k cash transactions? "it's hard to be a saint" is a massive shifting of the goalposts from "3 felonies per day". https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/irs-form-8300-reference-guide#penalties https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe... >Could seeding a torrent be interpreted as distribution? From wikipedia: United States v. LaMacchia 871 F.Supp. 535 (1994) was a case decided by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts which ruled that, under the copyright and cybercrime laws effective at the time, committing copyright infringement for non-commercial motives could not be prosecuted under criminal copyright law.
- hn_throwaway_99 1y agoTo be blunt, I think this blog post highlights everything that's wrong with Internet discourse today (and in 2013) : 1. First, make a bold assertion (i.e. that an average person commits three felonies a day) and provide absolutely zero evidence for this, or even an example of what those felonies are. Sure, this blog post references a book that I'm assuming has more info, but given that "vague, overbroad laws" are the central thesis of this blog post, the author should at least give some examples or evidence of what he's referring to. "Lie with citations", where you make a claim, and with a referenced link, but that link only has a tangential relationship with your claim, is all too common online. 2. The post brings up the example of Joseph P Nacchio's prosecution with a telling that is clearly one-sided and doesn't even entertain the possibility that he committed serious crimes. I absolutely believe it was possible he was prosecuted for his decision to push back against the NSA, but I'm certainly not going to believe it from this blog post. The Wikipedia article on Joseph Nacchio states "Nacchio claimed that he was not in a rightful state of mind when he sold his shares because of problems with his son, and the imminent announcement of a number of government contracts." So it seems clear to me he at least admitted that some of his stock sales were improper. What I think is even more assinine is that the one single example, a CEO who was prosecuted for insider trading, absolutely does not support the assertion that the average person commits 3 felonies a day, or that laws are overbroad. I'm quite sure I've never made any equity transactions that could be considered insider trading, so my empathy for this situation is low.
- woleium 1y agoWhen i read these sorts of articles i often wonder which “think tank” (i.e. corporate interest) paid for it.
- qingcharles 1y agoIn Illinois (and probably other states) it is illegal to violate the T&Cs of a web site: 720 ILCS 5/17-51 Computer tampering. (a) A person commits computer tampering when he or she knowingly and without the authorization of a computer's owner or in excess of the authority granted to him or her: (1) Accesses or causes to be accessed a computer or any part thereof, a computer network, or a program or data; (a-10) For purposes of subsection (a), accessing a computer network is deemed to be with the authorization of a computer's owner if: (2) the owner authorizes the public to access the computer network and the person accessing the computer network complies with all terms or conditions for use of the computer network that are imposed by the owner;
- Aloisius 1y ago(a)(1) is a misdemeanor, not a felony.
- qingcharles 1y agoFelony for multiple violations.
- Aloisius 1y agoIt doesn't look like it is: > (b)(1) A person who commits computer tampering as set forth in subdivision (a)(1) or (a)(5) or subsection (a-5) of this Section is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Repeat offenses for (a)(2) is a felony though. And (a)(3) and (a)(4) are felonies.
- bombcar 1y agoThree felonies a day? Rookie numbers.
- gweinberg 1y agoI've read 3 felonies a day. The title is pure bullshit. The book is mostly about the feds targeting mob lawyers for being mob lawyers. Maybe a mob lawyer really does typically commit 3 felonies a day.
- silexia 1y agoA government that grows too large has to find things to do, and most often those things to do take away your freedoms. A government that is tasked with "solving a problem" most often solves that problem in a way that infringes on your rights. Be very wary of big government and politicians who promise to miraculously solve all of your problems despite heading up a government that mostly poorly solves the problems it already has.