An unnecessary law

Do you remember that old saying about "if a tree fell in the forest"? Or "what if you threw a party but no one came"?

How about "what if you made a law that criminals never broke"? This one is not so funny, because what it means is that the only ones who break the law are otherwise law-abiding citizens like you and me.

Look what they are saying across the pond in England:


The widespread use of encryption by criminals - long feared by intelligence and law enforcement agencies - has yet to materialise, according to the man in charge of the country's largest digital forensics unit.

Mark Stokes, head of the Metropolitan Police's Digital and Electronic Forensic Services (DEFS), told The Register that "literally a handful" of the tens of thousands of devices it handles each year from across the whole of London involve encrypted data.


Simply stated, these elected officials made a law for a problem that didn't exist. The result is that the only arrest made under the law is someone who was not breaking any laws other than refusing to give up his password. I'm sure they used that line "if you have nothing to hide, just give us the password."

Why is that on a gun rights web page here? Think about the recent law where California recently made it illegal for owners of .50 calibre rifles to possess them. Forget the fact that none have been, or will be, used by a criminal. This law does nothing for the citizens or for their well-being, just like the crypto law in Britain. It must have another purpose, otherwise, it would be repealed.

In the quote above, if I had been writing the story, it would have included the following:


Because these so-called experts were wrong about encryption, related laws made based on these faulty predictions have been repealed. These "experts" now work at the local fish and chips restaurant wearing a paper hat and a nametag.


Maybe that is why they don't ask me to write for that paper.