On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 21:58:24 +0000, Alex Heney
wrote:
>>>I can see that those offences could be open to abuse by the
>>>authorities, which worries me, but as written, they are clearly
>>>talking about things which most people would consider "wrong".
>>
>>
>>Could you give an example of something that you believe would be
>>acceptable to carry out, but unacceptable to talk about carrying out?
>
>No.
>
>Who said anything about "acceptable"?
>
>Or about "talking about" doing something?
>
>But there are things which where done without any obvious forethought
>can be, if not "acceptable", at least considered minor enough to be a
>mere annoyance, but which if done with forethought and planning are
>much more serious.
>
>"Conspiracy to commit" any act automatically means it has that element
>of forethought and planning.
OK, then pedant, could you give an example of something that
you believe that actually doing the act should rightly be legal, but
conspiring to commit that same act should rightly be illegal?
Because it is my inability to think of a single thing of that nature
that causes me to believe that the conspiriacy law is in that regard
quite outrageous.
--
Cynic
|