So, it seems...

[mrph]

...you can be charged with possessing an extract of the Terrorist's Handbook, can you? Anyone know which law covers that?

Given how widely circulated it used to be, I suspect most of the people I knew at Uni would now be facing arrest.

Comments

[mrph.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I'm always a little wary of the "intent" aspect. It's woolly and subjective. Which makes for bad laws.

If I've got an AK47 stashed in my garage, I know where I stand with regard to the law.

If I've got a recipe for ricin, or a print out of some internet waffling about how to build bombs, I may or may not be a criminal. It depends. I don't much like that ambiguity.

[deliberateblank.livejournal.com]

Well, quite.

This would be an entirely different question in the States, but then they're a bit weird.

(Neither would merit a raised eyebrow, as long as you vote Republican.)

[lougarry.livejournal.com]

Ok, how about having recipe for a bomb, a van and 2 tons of cow poo...
"honest officer, I've got a big garden" ;)

[mrph.livejournal.com]

The van + cow poo combination isn't terribly unlikely. I mean, how else are you going to transport two tons of manure? :)

But even in that situation, I don't want to see people being prosecuted for having those things. If there's evidence of a plot, prosecute them under the appropriate "planning to kill people" laws. If there isn't, you shouldn't be prosecuting them for possessing items which aren't, by themselves, illegal.

I've read the anarchists cookbook and the terrorists handbook. In fact, I searched the net to see how available they were just after I saw this story, then skimmed them again - and records of that will be available to the police if they look, I guess. So if I have physical "bomb making materials" available too, should I now be charged?