Exactly. Though these days it would be hard to bomb anything without “using a computer” unless you were trying to do so.
Once again, throwing computers into the mix when there are already laws to cover the damage they describe. Maybe “using a computer” is there to secure a conviction where the vague details of “damaging national security, human welfare, the economy or the environment” wouldn’t suffice on their own.
1 Like
Tories, they are the very literal justification for the US reserving the personal right to assault weapons for governmental overthrow to this day
I don’t like them, but I think shooting people is a bit of an extreme response to politics you disagree with. Us Brits are wussy/civilised like that.
Also, how is an assault weapon going to save you from either the UK or US government? The Taliban have plenty of assault rifles but they don’t do much good against a Hellfire missile launched from a drone.
1 Like
This. They’d drop a daisycutter on your nana’s house if you pissed them off enough.
Watching vacuum sealed food sit in a 140F water bath for many hours?
4 Likes
There’s also another perspective…
2 Likes
"It seems unlikely that the bill would be used to prosecute bankers who use computers to crash the whole economy. "
Pity.
4 Likes
I like the word - ‘watching from below’. We need one for that.
1 Like
I agree, just pointing out the lasting historical damage they have created worldwide from their continuing pursuit of this philosophy.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
