by Mike Masnick
Thu, May 22nd 2008 6:48am
We've been mocking various attempts to get laws passed that would make it illegal for criminals to post evidence of their crimes on YouTube. This makes absolutely no sense -- as you're basically telling criminals "stop giving us the evidence we need to convict you." If the criminals are so dumb as to hand over such evidence, shouldn't the police and gov't officials be happy about it? Now, in a rather extreme example of this, the city council for Leeds, in the UK, has banned a man they refer to as one of the city's "dumbest criminals" from posting any more evidence to YouTube. In fact, the City Council even seems to recognize how helpful the guy has been: "He has handed us the evidence against him on a plate. In the last three years, we have seen a 32 per cent reduction in crime in Leeds. If more criminals were as obliging, the city would be even safer." So why would you ban him from uploading such evidence?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Florida Legislators Introduce Bill That Would Strip Certain Site Owners Of Their Anonymity
- Is Retweeting ISIS 'Material Support Of Terrorism'?
- Head Of UK Parliamentary Committee Overseeing Intelligence Agencies Resigns After Being Caught In Sting
- Humiliating Admission By UK Government That Yet More Of Its Surveillance Was Unlawful
- UK Intellectual Property Office Plays Up Imaginary 'Toxic' Claim In Grabbing Food Pretending To Be From Somewhere Else