Steve Walker posted
>
>- You're in a major motorway pile-up, but fortunately not injured. A police
>officer asks you to leave your wrecked vehicle in the fast lane, and walk
>along the the motorway a few hundred metres to a casualty clearing station.
>Walking around on motorways is normally a crime, but a good citizen would
>comply.
I probably would do so, but only because the benefits of doing so far
outweigh the minimal risk and minor consequences of being prosecuted.
>- You see a police officer struggling to arrest an armed bank robber. The
>suspect drops a firearm during the struggle, but it remains within his reach
>if he can manage to break free for a moment. The Police Officer asks you
>to pick it up and keep it safe until reinforcements arrive. Possession of
>an unlicenced firearm is normally a crime, but a good citizen would comply.
You must be kidding. I'd be over the horizon in a split second.
>
>- You are working on a computer when you find appalling pictures of child
>abuse. You ring the Police
You do *what*?
>and they ask you to hold onto the computer for
>10 minutes until they can get there to seize it, and specifically if anyone
>else (even it's lawful owner) asks for it you are to refuse to hand it over
>to them. Possession of child .ography is normally a crime, but a good
>citizen would comply.
I wouldn't dream of it. The benefits of complying are zero. The risk of
being prosecuted is non-negligible, and the *consequences* of being
prosecuted would be utterly calamitous.
--
Les Invalides |