|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 04 2013 @ 08:40 AM EDT |
Ignorance is not an excuse. However, ambiguity of the underlying law IS
an excuse.
The reason "ignorance is not an excuse" is that there is an
expectation that
a reasonable citizen knows what the law is and attempts to follow it. Laws
that are vague to the point that a well-meaning citizen cannot understand
what is and is not legal fail that standard.
And that's the case here. You could know the FAA and related codes
chapter and verse, and still not know what is and is not legal to browse to
under this theory.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 04 2013 @ 01:26 PM EDT |
is inevitable. If there is someone who, cautiously, actually tries to ensure
that their behavior is always within the limits of the law, I guarantee that
they do absolutely nothing (providing that they don't do that in such a
situation where it would be considered to be loitering with intent, etc)
In the current age, where the law spans millions of pages and decisions, there
is no way for anyone, in general, to know what laws might be used against them.
Especially in (global) situations, where you don't know which jurisdiction's
laws will be used to judge your conduct.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|