4 ms·
> I think if you append "with the intention to commit a violent crime" to each item on the list, you'll see the issue. That's problematic as you could literall
by ndsipa_pomu 4mo ago
> I think if you append "with the intention to commit a violent crime" to each item on the list, you'll see the issue.
That's problematic as you could literally append that to any action and thus condemn it as illegal e.g. met to have some coffees and a chat ... with the intention to commit a violent crime.
The problem is that there's not necessarily any connection between the activity and the alleged violent crime - that's what needs to be proven such as highlighting specific signal conversations that were evidence of planning the crime.
Also, what is problematic about first aid kits? How is being in a "concealed" position problematic?
- paisawalla 4mo ago> met to have some coffees and a chat ... with the intention to commit a violent crime I'm sorry, do you believe it's legal to meet someone for coffee and credibly plan the commission of a crime, which you then go on to commit?
- ndsipa_pomu 4mo agoMy point is that there has to be evidence to link the "meeting up for coffee" and the commission of a crime. If a group of people meet for coffee and then later one of them commits a crime, it's not necessarily a conspiracy to commit that crime unless there's evidence (e.g. recorded conversation or witnesses) that the crime was being discussed and planned whilst having a coffee. Simply appending the phrase "with the intention to commit a violent crime" should not be allowed without evidence of that intention.