Hacker News Reader

I think that most people would say that 2003 is not 'a long time ago.'

It actually happened in 1998, and the courts correctly dismissed the case. This was more of a case of the district attorney trying to punish some people and digging up an old 1973 law to do it because they didn't have a case. Now that law is formally defunct, rather than just being forgotten.

...so yeah, that's not a good example of your argument.

No, no, it's a good example. The law was on the books. Leaving enforcement up to the whims of a DA has a chilling effect.

There are a lot of "laws on the books" simply because there's no mechanism to go back and remove old laws. It doesn't mean they are relevant, enforced, or even still legal. Many laws technically stay on the books even after a court rules them unenforceable. It means nothing.

It's like having a 30 year old comment in a Windows driver about a variable no one uses anymore - no one cares and it doesn't reflect anything today.

Also, ONE stupid incident with ONE stupid prosecutor does not reflect society.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com