Re: [Full-disclosure] complaints about the governemnt spying!

[Leif Ericksen <leife@xxxxxxx>]

It comes back to ignorance of the law is no excuse.

So depending on the Lawyers, and the judges and possible jury you are
either boned or get a slight slap and are told do not do it again!

--
Lhe
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 14:14 -0500, bkfsec wrote:
> Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:04:43 CST, Leif Ericksen said:
> >  
> >
> >>There are those laws that are direct and clear cut, and there are the
> >>ones that takes an act of congress to decide what is legal or not.  ;)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >And then there are those you're not allowed to even *see*.  In Gilmore v. 
> >Ashcroft,
> >the Department of Justice finally consented to allow a *judge* with a 
> >security
> >clearance to see the text of the law, but Gilmore and his attorneys are still
> >denied access to what the law says.
> >  
> >
> 
> Which begs the question... How do you break a law that you don't know 
> exists?
> 
> How can one be expected not to break the law if the law is never made 
> available?
> 
>                    -bkfsec
> 
> 
-- 
Leif Ericksen <leife@xxxxxxx>

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/