Depressingly, he is actually more dangerous than the rapists. Even a very committed rapist would struggle to hurt more than a few dozen people in their lifetime. A skilled hacker could do far more damage than that if they were so inclined. Though that said it does seem a little incongruous given that America does allow people to own firearms, so you would think it would have less issue with people being dangerous.
I'm inclined to agree but I feel conflicted, caffeine withdrawl stops me ordering my thoughts. Hackers can be very dangerous, yes, but this man commited a very minor offense. They didn't even go with their bullshit "suspicion" charges to cover it up. At the most he should get a fine and a monitored internet connection / blacklist. Compared to two people commiting rape of an underage girl? Only getting one and two years in prison? Short of murder, there isn't really a worse crime you can commit against one person.
Unless they've found evidence that he's hacked other things (and he probably has, it'd be rather odd if he could and just only used it for this one thing) then yes, it is a bit odd to assume he's a serious risk. But even still, from the FBIs point of view, he's a threat to the entire country. Countries and their security agencies are universally paranoid, they're not much less paranoid in the UK so far as I know.
Based off what I can tell, this response really isn't any different than what any other country's security agency would do. It's well known that vigilante justice is illegal in most jurisdictions.
I will say that, as we're a smaller country, public outrage and press coverage tends to have a greater effect here, whereas that kind of thing in the US tends to just get shrugged off.
Wouldn't the US do the same for the UK (or probably many other western nations)? I get why this thread is a thing, but why is this particular point a thing?
French citizens have to abide by French law even if they're outside of France, for instance when that French guy went to Thailand to have legal sex with 12 year old prostitutes and got busted when he got back home. That sort of policy is pretty much in vein with what happened here. It's not just the US when it comes to this type of subjective stuff.
I don't understand. Are you saying that America wouldn't extradite someone to the uk if the person was breaking UK law? I thought extradition agreements went both ways.
Technically they do but not in practise, Murrica needs those prison populations high. This explains it all. Note that "The U.S. must and does present significant evidence to the UK with every extradition request. UK authorities consider that evidence before agreeing to extradite a suspect." is a big fat lie and Therisa May will happily sell out anyone for the dumbest of shit.
I don't think someone hacking your computer is comparable to him bending you over in terms of damage caused, ... because one costs a porta potty and the other is data infringement with high financial damage potential, so basically your ass is way cheaper, good thinking.
Interestingly it is more heavily policed in the west than human reproduction, however. It is easier to have a child than it is to get money for nothing.
This thread makes me sad though, also prison time isn't for punishment but rehabilitation and I think to hack someone you need a less harmfull mindset then you need to rape someone.
Quite possibly, but the skillset is inherently dangerous. It's like... if you had someone with a machinegun built into their brain that you couldn't remove. Even if they don't necessarily mean to, they can cause a lot more harm than someone who tries quite hard to use their dick the wrong way. Also prison time is for lots of things, rehabilitation is not really one of them any more though, unfortunately.
