3 ms·

So pointing out that an ill-conceived law can be abused damages discourse? That thinking probably helped give us the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

by glesica 13y ago

hahainternet 13y ago
No, acting as if a law which is currently not even in draft form will stop rapes being reported due to some minor technicality is a ridiculous assumption. For a start, even if this was the case, the CPS could not possibly bring forward a prosecution in the public interest. It's absurd on its face. Black and white thinking is usually fallacious and especially so here.
- glesica 13y ago
  I wasn't speculating that rapes would go unreported. I was pointing out that laws often have unintended consequences. I would be much more worried about innocent or incidental witnesses being prosecuted over-zealously or maliciously. For instance, until recently it was illegal to make an audio recording of another person without his or her express permission. These laws were put in place to prevent criminal "wiretaps" (for purposes of blackmail and the like). Of course every parent who recorded his daughter's dance recital was also committing a felony, but since no one was ever charged for that, nobody complained. But then the police realized that if they wanted to prevent someone from recording their illegal or embarrassing activities they could arrest the person for illegally wiretapping them. This led to a string of arrests and prosecutions for doing nothing more than documenting police brutality, incompetence or corruption. The point here is that laws have a way of being misused and some laws are easier to misuse than others. Censorship laws are in this category, so special consideration should always be given to the possible unintended consequences when such laws are considered. Perhaps over-zealous or malicious prosecution doesn't happen in the UK, this seems a bit far-fetched to me, but maybe it's true. It certainly happens in the US.
- ceol 13y ago
  This is something the majority of HN has absolutely no experience with, so they either a) try to relate it to the tech industry (and fail, see most of the terrible analogies in this thread), or b) reduce it to the most blackest and whitest of situations (see everyone here saying that outlawing pictures of rape is the death of free speech.) Of course, if 1 in 6 men were victims of an attempted or completed rape, and if 9 out of 10 victims of rape were men,[0] I'm sure the conversations here would be very different. [0]: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assau...
  - derleth 13y ago
    The CDC already refuses to recognize male rape victims because it defines rape as penetration: http://www.genderratic.com/p/836/manufacturing-female-victimhood-and-marginalizing-vulnerable-men/ http://www.genderratic.com/p/836/manufacturing-female-victim... So take statistics like that with a huge grain of salt.

So pointing out that an ill-conceived law can be abused damages discourse? That thinking probably helped give us the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

by glesica 13y ago

So pointing out that an ill-conceived law can be abused damages discourse? That thinking probably helped give us the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act...

hahainternet 13y ago

No, acting as if a law which is currently not even in draft form will stop rapes being reported due to some minor technicality is a ridiculous assumption. For a start, even if this was the case, the CPS could not possibly bring forward a prosecution in the public interest. It's absurd on its face. Black and white thinking is usually fallacious and especially so here.

glesica 13y ago
I wasn't speculating that rapes would go unreported. I was pointing out that laws often have unintended consequences. I would be much more worried about innocent or incidental witnesses being prosecuted over-zealously or maliciously. For instance, until recently it was illegal to make an audio recording of another person without his or her express permission. These laws were put in place to prevent criminal "wiretaps" (for purposes of blackmail and the like). Of course every parent who recorded his daughter's dance recital was also committing a felony, but since no one was ever charged for that, nobody complained. But then the police realized that if they wanted to prevent someone from recording their illegal or embarrassing activities they could arrest the person for illegally wiretapping them. This led to a string of arrests and prosecutions for doing nothing more than documenting police brutality, incompetence or corruption. The point here is that laws have a way of being misused and some laws are easier to misuse than others. Censorship laws are in this category, so special consideration should always be given to the possible unintended consequences when such laws are considered. Perhaps over-zealous or malicious prosecution doesn't happen in the UK, this seems a bit far-fetched to me, but maybe it's true. It certainly happens in the US.
ceol 13y ago
This is something the majority of HN has absolutely no experience with, so they either a) try to relate it to the tech industry (and fail, see most of the terrible analogies in this thread), or b) reduce it to the most blackest and whitest of situations (see everyone here saying that outlawing pictures of rape is the death of free speech.) Of course, if 1 in 6 men were victims of an attempted or completed rape, and if 9 out of 10 victims of rape were men,[0] I'm sure the conversations here would be very different. [0]: http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assau...
- derleth 13y ago
  The CDC already refuses to recognize male rape victims because it defines rape as penetration: http://www.genderratic.com/p/836/manufacturing-female-victimhood-and-marginalizing-vulnerable-men/ http://www.genderratic.com/p/836/manufacturing-female-victim... So take statistics like that with a huge grain of salt.