A Problem Of Plot Crime

A Problem Of Plot Crime
2006.05.10 2:18

We are discussing whether we ought to implement 'plot crime' in criminal code. The only problem this law has is this law will affect just an ordinary people rather than criminal people.
For criminal people they will violate this law without hesitation. They are criminal because they violate not only other law but this law too. Ordinary people start to try to respect this law as much as they can, that results in restricting the freedom of expression soon drastically.
List all Journal entries
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
I am willing to help test Slashdot's New Discussion System.
A Problem Of Plot Crime Preferences Top 4 comments Search Discussion
Display OptionsThreshold: -1: 4 comments 0: 4 comments 1: 4 comments 2: 3 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Conspiracy?(Score:2)
by Shadow Wrought (586631) * on 2006.05.10 2:58 (#15294876) (http://slashdot.org/~Shadow%20Wrought/journal Last Journal: 2006.11.25 4:38)
I think what you are talking about is what we call "conspiracy" over here. That is, it is illegal to plan with other people the commission of a crime. Indeed, it can be pretty harsh over here, too.
For example, if three people conspire to rob a bank, and if one of them during the robbery shoots and kills someone, then all three can be charged and convicted of murder, because they were all part of the same conspiracy.
The reason is that if, for a slightly different example, those three people had taken a hostage and brought the hostage back to an apartment. One of them killed the hostage, but none of them will take responsibility for it. The law doesn't care that none of them takes responsibility for it because, by law, they are all responsible.
In practice, however, prosecutors typically will do what they can to identify the shooter and hold them accountable with a much higher sentence. It doesn't always work, but they certainly do try.
--There are three types of information:
Need to know
Nice to know
Get a life
Re:Conspiracy?(Score:2)
by Degrees (220395) * <degrees@comcast. n e t> on 2006.05.10 9:16 (#15297770) (http://slashdot.org/~Degrees/journal Last Journal: 2006.11.21 14:40)
Another source of conspiracy: if an attorney and his client discuss a plan to tamper with a case (for example, plotting the murder of a witness), that qualifies as conspiracy.
--Define the finite space of spelling definitely - no A exists there
[ Parent ]
Re:Conspiracy?(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) * on 2006.05.11 0:21 (#15301192) (http://www.blogger.com/profile/11854854 Last Journal: 2006.11.22 3:02)
Different. It is different from conspiracy. If someone has been charged with conspiracy to murder, he is guilty of conspiracy even if he didn't commit murder it doesn't care. Suppose a murder was carried out actually by only one offender but if this heinous crime was plotted by more people other than the offender, those people ought to be charged with conspiracy. It is no doubt.
Plot crime is different from conspiracy. The crimes are neither carried out, nor planned, but just being talked about or discussed. Then those who just talked about committing a crime will be charged with plot crime. Even if they say they were just joking, they are punishable by plot crime. This law doesn't take into consideration whether the crime will be carried out. This law is aimed at our conversation. It's contents.
How do you think?
--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
[ Parent ]
Re:Conspiracy?(Score:2)
by Shadow Wrought (586631) * on 2006.05.11 3:53 (#15303022) (http://slashdot.org/~Shadow%20Wrought/journal Last Journal: 2006.11.25 4:38)
That is significantly different. So, as I understand it, if you and are talking about murder, not to be carried out but because we are writers discussing our craft, that is now a crime?
I don't think that that is right in the least. The core basis of criminal law is intent. The difference between talking about a crime and planning a crime is the intent to actually commit that crime. By that definition, they could arrest just about every writer in the country!
I don't know if Japan has the equivilent of our 1st Amendment or not, but if it does, then I think would clearly breach it.
--There are three types of information:
Need to know
Nice to know
Get a life
[ Parent ]