Is It Even Possible To Ban Someone From Using A Computer?
from the more-difficult-than-you-might-think dept
A few years back, after hearing about a few similar rulings, we wondered if it was reasonable (or even feasible) to ban someone from using computers or the internet if they were found guilty of committing crime online. It seemed pretty excessive, especially considering how integrated computers and the internet have become with every day life. Last summer, a judge came to the same conclusion overturning a ban while noting how excessive that is as punishment. Apparently, however, not all judges quite understand this. A woman accused of fraud in a tax preparation scam has been banned from using computers while she waits for trial. That seems excessively broad (especially for someone who hasn't been found guilty yet). And how do they define "computer" in this situation? Can she use a mobile phone? What about an ATM machine? Self-checkout computer? This seems like one of those things that sounds good to a judge who hasn't actually thought through the ramifications of such a broad ban in today's world.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Yes. Solitary confinement. Complete appendage dismemberment. Etc.
In the real world?
No fricken way.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wow!
An electronic, digital device that stores and processes information.
So that pretty much means she's sc*ewed! Hell, with that definition if pushed you could argue that almost anything electric that stores state information couldn't be used.
I often wonder in these cases what's the point. Can she by proxy have someone else use a computer for her. If so, isn't that dangerous.
What amazes me is that we have a significant number of successful business owners as clients that don't use a computer at all and frankly wouldn't see a problem with this. Then again, they have enough money to pay someone else to deal with everyone else that does have to use them.
Freedom
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Not for this
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Not for this
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Wow!
Her scale is off limits as well if it's not the kind with a simple pressure plate that turns a wheel.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sheesh
-Can't use a digital watch, clock, a stove w/digital read-out, microwave, radio, electronic keyboard
You get my point. The terms of the "banishment" should be limited to Internet access. That means no access from home, cell phone, library, etc.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
they did it to mitnick
then, when he went on lecture tours talking about security they tried to stop him from doing that too. i guess when they banned him from "using" computers, they meant "thinking about" computers.
honestly, it would be more humane to just kill the person.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
out of touch judges
No, this seems like on of those things that sounds good to a 70-year-old judge who can't get his VCR to stop flashing 12:00 AM. There is a serious generation gap between the people who make and interpret law and the rest of us.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Lets hope she has an older version car
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I certainly she doesn't have...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
The judiciary is woefully uninformed technologically
In industry we demand specificity --- in the justice system it is abhorred.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wow..
Why not simply just put her in jail if she's such a risk? That pretty much ensures she won't be using a computer..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You guys are all...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You guys are all...
She's being charged on fraud, id theft, and forgery counts...life in prison...what country do you live in?
If convicted, she'll be free within 5 years.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This topic
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Sheesh
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Pet Peeve
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Pet Peeve
Also, forgive me for the blank post. That's what I get for hitting enter too soon.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Pet Peeve
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Yes
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Yes
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Collect unemployment? Oops!
Where's Swift when you need another "Modest Proposal?"
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Breathing
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment