PDA

View Full Version : Should posession of books be a crime


racedo
3rd Oct 2018, 00:29
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-45713045

No doubt there is more here than meets the eye but should posession of books be a crime
(Caveat is when nothing was done in writing or publishing the book to make it a crime.................. i.e Paedophilia)

WingNut60
3rd Oct 2018, 01:51
Pointless, I'd have thought.
You can just read it all on the web anyway.

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 01:58
What should be demonstrated is intent. Prosecuting for mere possession is pretty silly. Those documents have been floating around the web for many years by now.

I, and millions more, have d/l'd those or similar docs out of idle curiosity and nothing more. Yes, I confess that I may still have them on some old backup. I also have a pretty good working knowledge of nukes, though, sadly, not the engineering details.

It must be very scary to live where some monitoring software can flag your downloads and put you on a list of miscreants from which you will never be removed.

EEngr
3rd Oct 2018, 02:08
I have an old Chemical Engineering Handbook with (among other things) the details for putting together an industrial scale nitroglycerin plant.

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 02:43
I found something similar in the city library. At 12 it would have been a bit of a job laying my grubby little hands on the required equipment. It also contained the recipe and instructions for black powder. This was of course quickly jotted down. Then there were many a bang, but we still have all of our fingers and eyes intact. That was in the sixties, I wonder if the book is still there.

KelvinD
3rd Oct 2018, 07:11
Nobody is being charged with having books. He is being charged with " collecting information which was likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. "
And I wouldn't worry about "some monitoring software flagging your downloads". I am sure they would have probably charged him on the evidence found after examining his PC history.
I am sure this person had done something which had attracted the attention of the counter terrorism mob.

DaveReidUK
3rd Oct 2018, 07:51
Nobody is being charged with having books. He is being charged with "collecting information which was likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism."

I'm not sure that the distinction between books and e-books (he had the latter, on his phone) is meaningful, except that hard-copy books on bomb-making are presumably harder to come by. Both fall under the scope of "collecting information".

And I wouldn't worry about "some monitoring software flagging your downloads". I am sure they would have probably charged him on the evidence found after examining his PC history.
I am sure this person had done something which had attracted the attention of the counter terrorism mob.

I'm not so sure. If I were minded to locate and download the IRA Green Book, for example, I wouldn't be surprised to get a knock on the door. Even mentioning it on social media might be enough. Oops. :O

VP959
3rd Oct 2018, 07:59
Years ago, back in the days of usenet, I acquired a copy of the Anarchists Cook Book, which included detailed instructions on making bombs, explosives, detonators etc. I downloaded it out of curiosity, really just to see how good the information in it was.

I went looking for it on old archived data, and made sure it was permanently deleted, a couple of years ago, when possession of this book was cited as evidence of terrorist intent during a trial, and made me think that just being in possession of it from many years earlier might now be an offence. If I had to guess I'd say there are probably tens of thousands (or more) copies of that book sitting in people's archived data, and the majority of those people won't be terrorists, but may have just had a passing interest in things that go bang.

As a schoolboy I made weedkiller and sugar "bombs", as well as gunpowder, nitrogen triiodide, etc, and I doubt I'm in any way unusual as I've heard many stories of others who were also curious about things that go bang when they were kids. I wouldn't mind betting that almost all the information that was collated in these books is now available freely and easily online, if anyone cares to go looking for it, anyway, and anyone who wants this information for illicit purposes could probably find it anonymously on the web, as it seems that terrorists are now pretty savvy when it comes to using encryption and anonymity tools.

blue up
3rd Oct 2018, 08:10
Saltpetre, Charcoal, Flowers of Sulphur. Right, now you're all guilty of terrorism!

I, however, am a licenced Explosives handler.:ok: [Makes it fun going through the security area at Cardiff]

Pontius Navigator
3rd Oct 2018, 08:37
And we had a practical demonstration of black powder in our club .The first lay on a foil tray and fizzled. When he placed another foil tray on top it but the ceiling.

In the 50s all school chemistry books had the formula for gunpowder and the 6th form ones had much better ones. Then easing off a bullet to exposed the cordite.

Tankertrashnav
3rd Oct 2018, 10:09
I remember when weedkiller and sugar bombs were all the rage and my friends and I produced some pretty impressive bangs in the park using washing up liquid containers stuffed with the mixture. The authorities were sufficiently worried about the craze to arrange for a demo to emphasise the dangers at the local fire station, which was shown on local TV. Their effort produced nothing but a lot of smoke and a pathetic "phut". We were tempted to go round and explain where they were going wrong, but decided that might not be the best course of action!

racedo
3rd Oct 2018, 11:21
Nobody is being charged with having books. He is being charged with " collecting information which was likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. "


That is a catch all term because it allows someone else to define it and then decide you will be prosecuted.

I believe in next 10 years there will be no readily available New Maps published as it will all be online and therefore accessible from there.
Great for Govts who wish to hide places BUT it will mean that anybody holding paper maps can come under this catch all phrase with authorities claiming
you do not NEED paper maps because it is online, unless you have other purposes for having it.


And I wouldn't worry about "some monitoring software flagging your downloads". I am sure they would have probably charged him on the evidence found after examining his PC history.
I am sure this person had done something which had attracted the attention of the counter terrorism mob.

"The I am sure this person had done something" is one where again WE automatically give the benefit of ANY doubt to the Police and Government, Why is this ?

Police and Govt lie and make stuff up.............................. you have automatically found someone guilty.
That is scary, because everybody else will do the same.

DaveReidUK
3rd Oct 2018, 11:27
I believe in next 10 years there will be no readily available New Maps published as it will all be online and therefore accessible from there.
Great for Govts who wish to hide places BUT it will mean that anybody holding paper maps can come under this catch all phrase with authorities claiming
you do not NEED paper maps because it is online, unless you have other purposes for having it.

Presumably this will involve confiscation of everybody's printers ?

racedo
3rd Oct 2018, 11:34
Presumably this will involve confiscation of everybody's printers ?

Nope but if you manipulate online maps not to show something then online it doesn't exist.

I am fully aware that O/S have done this for decades with paper maps but that changed 15 years ago.

However I feel it will go the other way.

KelvinD
3rd Oct 2018, 12:34
I didn't assume this person had done something. He admitted it himself. The point I was trying to make though was not a defence of the authorities, I have no more trust in them than do you, but I was looking at things from a more pragmatic view point. The authorities don't have the funds or resources to become a full time, all-watching, all-listening Big Brother. This is proved regularly when we see statements such as "Mr X was not on the police radar" or "He had been investigated and was deemed of no further interest". The implication in both cases is that no resources were allocated to watching this person. The authorities have no choice other than to wait for these people to make themselves obvious and attract attention to themselves.

NutLoose
3rd Oct 2018, 13:23
Nobody is being charged with having books. He is being charged with " collecting information which was likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. "

AA road atlas with a map of London then would fall into that category after the Westminster attacks etc, as would a London underground, bus and rail timetable.

DaveReidUK
3rd Oct 2018, 13:25
I didn't assume this person had done something. He admitted it himself.

Well yes, but you suggested that he had done something that attracted the attention of the security services, which in turn led to the discovery of the documents on his PC.

All he admitted to was that he had downloaded them, which of itself wouldn't have caused any alarm bells to ring.

So what else had he done?

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 13:43
Nobody is being charged with having books. He is being charged with " collecting information which was likely to be useful for the purposes of terrorism. "

A tenuous distinction at best. If I go to a second hand book shop and buy a copy of The Anarchist's Handbook, am I not "collecting information etc..."?

And I wouldn't worry about "some monitoring software flagging your downloads". I am sure they would have probably charged him on the evidence found after examining his PC history.

So how was he found out? Was there some other reason for examining his computer? We all know the software exists.

I am sure this person had done something which had attracted the attention of the counter terrorism mob.

Yes, of course, the old no smoke without fire chestnut.

As I said above, possession is not admission or evidence of intent. Unless the law has changed and curiosity is now a crime.

Harley Quinn
3rd Oct 2018, 13:47
Ah, the benefits of a public school education........was the first example some sort of initiation rite or an attempt at human sacrifice then ? and not forgetting having access to bullets, not something yer average grammar or secondary modern oik would have ready access to.

"As a schoolboy I made weedkiller and sugar "bombs", as well as gunpowder, nitrogen triiodide, etc, and I doubt I'm in any way unusual as I've heard many stories of others who were also curious about things that go bang when they were kids"

Yep. there was a indeed a thread on here some time ago when our various somewhat misguided and potentially lethal attempts in our younger days were happily presented to the world to show we survived. And in fact, there was a suitably complex offering from yourself plus something about blowing up "cats eyes" in the road....mere milk bottles being far too basic of course, plus a very interesting account of explosives which bore, lets call it an "uncanny resemblance " to a very similar piece readily available on the web .....what a bizarre coincidence you might say.
Perhaps you should be less cynical and consider time and context. My FiL grew up in North Norfolk during and after WWII and as a youngster he and his friends would recover unfired rounds from the various training areas, recover the cordite and make what were essentially mortars. My BiL at the age of 11 or 12 found a grenade and took it to school. Fortunately one of the staff recognised it for what it was and called in the authorities.

BehindBlueEyes
3rd Oct 2018, 13:51
I remember feeling incredibly rebellious bringing a copy of Spycatcher by Peter Wright into the U.K. whilst it was banned from publication by the government in the 1980s. I saw copies being sold whilst on holiday abroad so thought I would buy one and smuggle it back.

Tbh, it was really boring and I’m not sure I even finished reading it.

DaveReidUK
3rd Oct 2018, 14:04
As I said above, possession is not admission or evidence of intent. Unless the law has changed and curiosity is now a crime.

That's the point - it is.

Terrorism Act 2000 s.58:

(1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he collects or makes a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b) he possesses a document or record containing information of that kind.
(2) In this section “record” includes a photographic or electronic record.
(3) It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that he had a reasonable excuse for his action or possession.

The Act is silent regarding whether curiosity is a "reasonable excuse".

DaveReidUK
3rd Oct 2018, 14:07
I remember feeling incredibly rebellious bringing a copy of Spycatcher by Peter Wright into the U.K. whilst it was banned from publication by the government in the 1980s. I saw copies being sold whilst on holiday abroad so thought I would buy one and smuggle it back.

Tbh, it was really boring and I’m not sure I even finished reading it.
I bought mine in the US shortly after it was published. I got about halfway through before I gave up.

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 15:14
Terrorism Act 2000 s.58:

Ouch, that's vague and broad enough to get you for just about anything if they feel like it. Scary.

VP959
3rd Oct 2018, 15:16
Thanks for the excerpt from the law @DaveReidUK, it makes me thankful that I sought out and deleted the copy of that book I'd acquired many years earlier. One issue is that law can't make me forget stuff. It seems, from reading that excerpt, that the offence isn't just committed by making a record, but can also be committed by "collecting information". I wonder if remembering what was in that book, or a variety of other stuff related to making explosives, detonators etc from when I was young, constitutes "collecting information"?

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 15:23
You're done for. You certainly possess and retain the memory of that information.

annakm
3rd Oct 2018, 15:28
This is all starting to sound like Minority Report:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)

The authorities know you’re about to commit a crime before even you do.

“The film's central theme is the question of free will (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will) versus determinism (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism). It examines whether free will can exist if the future is set and known in advance. Other themes include the role of preventive government in protecting its citizenry, the role of media in a future state where technological advancements make its presence nearly boundless, the potential legality of an infallible prosecutor, and Spielberg's repeated theme of broken families.”

racedo
3rd Oct 2018, 16:03
Ouch, that's vague and broad enough to get you for just about anything if they feel like it. Scary.

Hence reason for the Thread is Police can define "anything" as they wish and you get labelled and added to list of people of Interest.

racedo
3rd Oct 2018, 16:11
The authorities don't have the funds or resources to become a full time, all-watching, all-listening Big Brother. .

They already have them....................... CCTV everywhere, ANPR and CCTV recording numberplates everywhere, access to transactions you make using electronic payments, access to ISP records and computer without consent, record of where you have been with your phone.

At UEFA Champions League Final 2017 South Wales police used Facial Recognition software on everyone who attended.

This is what we know of now............ just not all joined up in collation Yet.

pattern_is_full
3rd Oct 2018, 17:46
No. Mere possession of an book should never be a crime. Smacks of Germany in the 1930s and the USSR throughout its existence.

Possession of a book may be supporting evidence - in concert with substantial other evidence (such as, oh, a list of targets and some overt act) - of some crime other than "possession of a book."

Over here in the U.S., the appropriate response would not have been a guilty plea, but a challenge to the constitutionality of the law. Which would probably succeed, under the First Amendment, except in very limited cases, e.g. child pornography.

Tankertrashnav
3rd Oct 2018, 17:47
Should posession of books be a crime
Not sure about possession of books being a crime racedo, but you ought to know that the spelling police are after you ;).

RatherBeFlying
3rd Oct 2018, 18:21
Total Resistance by Hans von Dach (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Resistance_(book)) was published by the Swiss Sergeants Association in anticipation of invasion by the Nazis.

I guess in Iraqi hands, it would fall under (1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he collects or makes a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or
(b) he possesses a document or record containing information of that kind:p

belfrybat
3rd Oct 2018, 18:52
Abbie Hoffman's Steal This Book too, especially chapter 5. Easily found for download.

teeteringhead
3rd Oct 2018, 18:59
A friend - honest; not me - was clearing out an attic and found some old crockery wrapped in newspaper. The newspapers (sic) in question were the Sun circa late 60s early 70s IIRC.

Page 3 was much in evidence, and quite a few of the "models" were under 18, some as young as 16. I pointed out that such images were now illegal, despite having been in a mass circulation paper (Thinks - wonder if Colindale has copies??).

It's a mad world my masters, even odder was when we worked out that the "young models" would be pushing 70 now......

India Four Two
3rd Oct 2018, 19:02
belfrybat,

The only time I saw Abbie Hoffman's book was in a used bookstore, in a locked glass-fronted cabinet! :)

radeng
4th Oct 2018, 11:13
Back in the 1980s, the semiconductor company at which I worked were approached by the Met for technical information in regard to a bomb which had contained at least one of our radio integrated circuits. Presumably having a data book for that device now could be classed as an offence........

Pontius Navigator
4th Oct 2018, 11:16
belfrybat,

The only time I saw Abbie Hoffman's book was in a used bookstore, in a locked glass-fronted cabinet! :)
Check a certain South American river site

belfrybat
4th Oct 2018, 11:43
If you really must have a physical copy. It was less than a minute from search to have the pdf on-screen. Pretty much in the spirit of the title.

Tankertrashnav
4th Oct 2018, 11:49
Check a certain South American river site


Do you mean Amazon? I think it used to be that if you typed site names like ebay, Facebook, Amazon etc on PPRuNe strange things happened, like Trabant used to come out as Land Rover, but that no longer applies. No need for Farcebook, Fleabay etc any more.

pax britanica
4th Oct 2018, 12:15
It is always useful for the 'authorities' to have some catch all laws, the old Metropolitan Polcie act enabled them to detain someone on suspicion of the being a suspected person (ie anyone ) .

The problem with these laws is we are reminded from time to time that a lot of police are not honest and we all know that almost all politicians are at heart unsuitable to be in any job in government due to party loyalty, personal ambition, bribery and corruption.

You just have to hope that in Uk at least the usual mixture of incompetence and laziness among public officials, the media, allied to a scattering of 'good guys ' means we dont end up one day as 1930s Germany. I mean if Boris and the Mail had their way I should probably be imprisoned for voting remain. And its easy to see the US returning to a form of McCarthyism under the current President

belfrybat
4th Oct 2018, 13:31
The only time I saw Abbie Hoffman's book was in a used bookstore, in a locked glass-fronted cabinet!

I guess they didn't want to risk someone taking the title too literally ;)

racedo
4th Oct 2018, 13:34
And its easy to see the US returning to a form of McCarthyism under the current President

Strane that it seems the other side of the political divide is the one that seems more likely in going for this............
Universitys where "white privelege" claim justifies them doing whatever they want.
Snowflakes and reactions when someone doesn't vote the way they want.
Media and Tech giants imposing their will on people.
Controls on what people are doing, thinking and speaking.

Today's anti Russia Witch hunt is Democrat led

ethicalconundrum
4th Oct 2018, 19:33
And its easy to see the US returning to a form of McCarthyism under the current President

You really have a tough time with US political history. Maybe a reading of Executive Order 9835 would be of value(Dem president Truman)? Follow that up with investigation into the HUAC group, spearheaded by Dies(Dem), along with FDR who wrote and supported the internment of Japanese during the war by mostly Dem president and congress. Post war HR member Ed Hart(Dem), later replaced by another HR Dem(forgot name) until the committee was deactivated due to citizens being outraged over their Dem politicians trying to harass normal working citizens. There is some activity going on similar to the HUAC nonsense of the 40s and 50s, but it's all been done by the left side of the aisle, not the right. In the Senate of the day, the committee was know as the SISS, and it was formed by Pat McCarran(Dem), not McCarthy(Rep). those famous words; 'are you now, or have you ever been....' were spoken by Parnell Thomas, not McCarthy. Although certainly Joe got into the spirit of the Democratic led SISS with plenty of blame later on.

Trump hasn't led or instituted any kind of personal investigation of anyone. However, he has been the TARGET of plenty of personal, family, and unfounded partisan attacks in the congress, courts, and media.

Really, study some background before making a fool of yourself.

Krystal n chips
5th Oct 2018, 06:19
.

Trump hasn't led or instituted any kind of personal investigation of anyone. However, he has been the TARGET of plenty of personal, family, and unfounded partisan attacks in the congress, courts, and media.

Really, study some background before making a fool of yourself.

Well that's an interesting slant on matters, the bit about him being a target......note the lower case here, because unfortunately, and probably inconveniently for you, he's not exactly been averse to attacking everybody from whole nations, ethnic groups, various media sources and individuals.......to name but a few.

Or are these attacks him simply defending his good name..... and impeccable character..... so frequently displayed to the global population ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_on_social_media

Of course, all the examples in the above will probably be summarily dismissed as......fake noos !

pr00ne
5th Oct 2018, 13:09
Racedo,

​​​​​​"The I am sure this person had done something" is one where again WE automatically give the benefit of ANY doubt to the Police and Government, Why is this ?

Police and Govt lie and make stuff up.............................. you have automatically found someone guilty.
That is scary, because everybody else will do the same.

This is about arresting someone, once someone is arrested they have a legal right to a DEFENCE LAWYER who will represent them in court. Police and Governments are not the only people who sometimes lie and make stuff up... they do not do it as a matter of course. I am talking about out here in the real world of course.

racedo
5th Oct 2018, 15:34
This is about arresting someone, once someone is arrested they have a legal right to a DEFENCE LAWYER who will represent them in court. Police and Governments are not the only people who sometimes lie and make stuff up... they do not do it as a matter of course. I am talking about out here in the real world of course.

Well it depends whether one is versed enough in the law.
Most people are not.

Arrest someone on something spurious, call it terrorism but use the arrest as a fishing expedition to see what else you can get plus pull someone's life apart in doing so.
The shock factor of being arrested, charged, held and then subject to life changing threats will terrify pretty much most people, especially if they have done nothing wrong.

Police are no more bent and corrupt than they were previously, just now it gets reported a bit more.

ethicalconundrum
5th Oct 2018, 16:43
Well that's an interesting slant on matters, the bit about him being a target......note the lower case here, because unfortunately, and probably inconveniently for you, he's not exactly been averse to attacking everybody from whole nations, ethnic groups, various media sources and individuals.......to name but a few.
!

Hey, your strawman is leaking - well, straw. Here's what I wrote, in case you need better glasses: " Trump hasn't led or instituted any kind of personal investigation of anyone." So if you say Trump has "attacked" individuals, groups, and whole nations, so what? Pocahontas? Hey, don't lie about your ethic background. Iran? Hey again, don't be terrorists. Antifa? this one is kinda obvious, don't advocate the destruction of the republican US form of govt.

I'm sure you prefer a bowing, and scraping exec of the US who scuffs his knees felating all our enemies trying to win a Nobel. BTW, Trump has been under investigation by the NY AG, the US Mueller probe(and I do mean 'probe'), and a few investigations made up of whole cloth over his taxes. So my statement stands un-refuted by your straw.

Pax delved into some kind of partisan whipping boy trying to link Trump to the new McCarthyism. I pointed out that like that era, if there is a new low in slandering peoples good name without any basis, it is the DEMS in control back then, and again now with the shenanigans from Feinstein, and Spartacus(oops, I mean Booker) dragging a beer drinking teenager who is now a respected jurist through the mud on no more than the weakest of sauce, which has been refuted by EVERYONE but her.