~ archived since 2018 ~

Woman Jailed for Texting Threats to Herself

ashpatil

July 13, 2010

44 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://www.articlesaboutmen.com/2010/07/woman-jailed-for-texting-threats-to-herself-911/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Woman Jailed for Texting Threats to Herself
Author	ashpatil
Upvotes	44
Comments	17
Date	July 13, 2010 10:10 AM UTC (16 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/cozhq/woman_jailed_for_texting_threats_to_herself/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/woman-jailed-for-texting-threats-to-herself.1048642 https://theredarchive.com/post/1048642

Comments

[–]david2212 6 points7 points8 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Yep_Black 3 points4 points5 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yorlik 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 2 points3 points4 points 16 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]yorlik 4 points5 points6 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 4 points5 points6 points 16 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Let's re-frame your statement, Infinitely:

Her misuse of it aside, computers are now a fairly necessary safety tool that it would be unethical to legally deprive someone of. If she got lost, or hurt, or stranded somewhere, and was unable to get help, she could very rightfully sue the state for damages.

Yet the same, if a person misuses a computer for hacking or other computer-related crimes, part of their punishment is being banned from using them for a period of time. Convicted felons are not allowed to own firearms, people convicted of embezzlement and other financial crimes are legally not allowed to work in the financial sector again, and people convicted of child abuse/molestation are legally prevented from working with children.

This woman has abused the privilege of using a cell phone and maliciously used one to harm two other people and deprive them of their liberty. A legal injunction preventing her from using cell phones for a given period is not too harsh a punishment for this person.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 16 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 16 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot -1 points0 points1 point 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The device has everything to do with the crime. It was the vehicle in which she committed the crime and furthermore, she acquired it in a fraudulent manner.

As for "paper and pencil," handwriting analysis can easily detect a forged note, computers can be traced using basic IP address detection systems (if she went to a library, it wouldn't take much to discover if she was at a given computer at a given time of day), and as for payphones, there is already a legal component in place for the misuse of landline telephones in committing crimes.

But even so, we are talking about the use of a convenience item, rather than a practical necessity. People have their drivers licenses suspended every day for less than what this woman has done to these two people. In today's society, if you lose your driver's license, you very well may lose your means to make a living. If you lose access to a landline telephone, your quality of life is severely impacted.

While losing access to a cellphone may affect your personal quality of life, it isn't a world-ending inconvenience.

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 16 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]kragshot -1 points0 points1 point 16 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The argument doesn't work reframed though. You don't carry your computer around with you everywhere, and it couldn't save you if you get into a car accident at three in the morning on a rural road, whereas a cell phone could.

It's called a laptop computer with a mobile wireless connection.

But, regardless of the above, my point is that having and owning a cellphone is a privilege, not a right. Depriving somebody of a cellphone is not denying them an unalienable civil right. There are people all over the country and the world who do not have the financial resources or the technical infrastructure to own/use a cellphone.

This woman has illegally taken a cellphone out in another person's name and committed illegal acts with it. She has proven that she does not deserve the privilege to have access to one.