From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 95 23:01:11 PDT
To: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Growth of actions definded as crime. Which math formula?
In-Reply-To: <v02120d0fac72f40a1ca9@[192.0.2.1]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950906015851.24246A-100000@access2.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Tue, 5 Sep 1995, Lucky Green wrote:

> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 1995 23:01:01 -0800
> From: Lucky Green <shamrock@netcom.com>
> To: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>
> Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com
> Subject: Re: Growth of actions definded as crime. Which math formula?
> 
> At 23:56 9/5/95, Black Unicorn wrote:
> rypted mail preferred.
> >
> >Really it's hard to answer this because what constitutes a "NEW" act is a
> >real question in and of itself.
> >
> >For example, wire fraud.  Is it a "NEW" crime?  Or just a subset of
> >fraud, or mail fraud?
> 
> If they guy would have gotten away before the new law was passed, it is a
> new crime.

This is very rare.  It's mostly in definitional cases, for example, where 
Extacy was just not defined as a controlled substance some years ago.

Created crimes are few and far between.

There's a lot of jurisprudence.  Criminals are creative, but there are 
only so many things that can't be covered by "Fraud."

> 
> That's the stats I am looking for.
> 
> -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com>
>    PGP encrypted mail preferred.
> 
> 
> 

00B9289C28DC0E55 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est
E16D5378B81E1C96 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa    -    wichtig!
*New Key Information*    -    Finger for key revocation and latest key update.