On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:58:16 +0000, Dissenter wrote:
>>It is a deliberate act against the law as
>>much as driving past a speed camera is a deliberate act. There are no
>>other higher principles at stake. They want this form of entertainment.
>>This form of entertainment isn't available to them legally. So they
>>choose to break the law.
>
>That's like saying that . is just a form of entertainment. It's much
>more than that, unless you are too old to remember. Whether you regard
>paedophilia to be a 'perversion' of the . drive (as homo.uality
>was not so long ago in this country) is beside the point - . is ..
>What can substitute for it? Well, . is one possibility, but that is
>banned too.
That's assuming that the convict *is* in fact .ually motivated. Not
everyone convicted has been found with hundreds of images that they
have deliberately collected. The law does not differentiate. The
consequences are much the same.
You may be a perfect driver and so not realise it Sue, but not
everyone who breaks the speed limit has done so deliberately. I have
3 points on my licence because I had mistakenly believed the speed
limit on the road to be 40MPH when it was 30MPH. I was certainly
inattentive, maybe even careless, but was *not* a deliberate act of
law breaking as you have claimed it must be.
Had I been intentionally and knowingly breaking the law, I would have
slowed to 30MPH whilst going past the speed camera and so evaded
penalties. It was the fact that I *didn't* realise I was breaking the
law that was my downfall.
--
Cynic
|