If I’m carrying a korean knock-off of an iPhone, can I get arrested?
MIT student arrested at Logan airport with fake bomb
“Simpson was arrested around 8 a.m. at Logan International Airport … and was charged with disturbing the peace and possessing a hoax device. She was scheduled to be arraigned later today.”
Is that the entirety of the charge? I mean, I don’t mean to nitpick, because I think she was a fucking suicidal idiot, to be frank, but WTF is “a hoax device?”
It makes me think of the kid who was arrested for putting question-mark boxes around the city (a la Super Mario), and was told he’d be facing criminal charges. What, we can’t fuck around with our fellow man anymore? I mean, how am I supposed to know what counts as a simple joke that you might see on some japanese TV show, and what will get me arrested as being clearly a terrorist? Is it my fault if someone sees an L.E.D. figure I’ve put up in a public space and decides it needs to be blown up?
*sigh*
In other depressing news, I let the Comcast guy convince me to get 6 months of free digital cable at the same price I’m paying now to live without, with 1.99 installation. I did it mostly for the increase in internetting speed that happens when you combo. I’m going to go into my calendar right now and warn myself about that plan’s expiration.
Some of you might wonder why I’d consider that depressing. I’ve gone about ten years without having cable TV in my own place, and I’ve gotten a lot done in that time. I’m just hoping I don’t resort to it when I’m bored and miss out on other things.
What, we can’t fuck around with our fellow man anymore?
Strange device strapped to one’s chest. At an airport.
You’re kidding me, right?
You read the rest of my post, right? I said she was a suicidal fool, and I meant that literally. Of course one doesn’t make a bomb-shaped device and not expect to get shot.
My question was about the part I put in bold, and wondering exactly how detailed and descriptive that charge actually is. The examples I used of people ‘possessing a hoax device’ that I am aware of have nothing to do with her, nor with criminal intent.
Is that the charge that was used for your other examples?
Since neither of the items I mentioned involved the creator directly, I doubt there could be any charge of possessing anything.
I asked a question (whether or not the charge was as simple as stated in the article) and then considered the ways that, if it was, the implication that possessing a ‘hoax device’ of any nature, no matter how benign is being criminalized. I’m sorry that the circumstance that brought up the question does not further my point, but that’s real life – this article is where I saw the reference.
Had she been charged with possession of a device intended for terrorism purposes, or possession of a lethal weapon prop or any other charge that identified that it was the fact that it was made to look like a bomb that made it a crime, I would not have had anything to say.
alrighty
no, seriously. ‘sallllllllllllll good.
No doubt, this kid was stupid. Seriously, seriously stupid. However, when it comes to the charge against her, I’m reminded of the “trafficking counterfeit contraband substances” charge that I read about yesterday, with the three guys selling fake drugs. I didn’t know that such a charge existed.
We are getting too thin-skinned (see for example that kid in Ohio who got suspended for tricking the fans of the opposing high school into spelling “WE SUCK” at a football game), but this airport thing or even the fake drug thing isn’t as clear cut as simply fucking with people. The high school prank may hurt some feelings, but in the end it’s harmless fucking with people, so that’s pretty pure and really ought to be laughed off rather than strongly punished. The fake drugs could constitute fraud, since these guys made money off it, so in my mind that’s less “fucking with people” and more “ripping off stupid people”. But the MIT chick… wearing a fake bomb into an airport is akin to shouting “fire” in a crowded theater. That makes this prank much more dangerous than the other two. That potential to incite panic is what she should’ve been charged with, rather than carrying a “hoax device”.
But, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.
I’m right there with you.
FYI:
Massachusettes Code regarding Hoax Devices:
M.G.L.A. 266 § 102A 1/2, a statute that went into effect in 2002, which reads:
“(a) Whoever… uses or places… any hoax device or hoax substance with the intent to cause anxiety, unrest, fear or personal discomfort to any person or group of persons shall be punished by imprisonment in a house of correction for not more than two and one-half years or by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment.”
Definition of Hoax Device
“…the term “hoax device” shall mean any device that would cause a person reasonably to believe that such device is an infernal machine.”
Definition of Infernal Machine:
“…the term “infernal machine” shall mean any device for endangering life or doing unusual damage to property, or both, by fire or explosion, whether or not contrived to ignite or explode automatically.”
You have been legal edumacated :)
So no. Unless you Korean iPod looked like an infernal machine … or the boxes looked like one … you could not be arrested under that statute.
Well! Thank you very much for providing the details! I feel better regarding this particular law.
I too was like “WTF!! A HOAX device?!” so I had to look it up.
There are still major issues with proving up the intent of this girl … but at least the definition of the device seems reasonable – if it looks like a bomb … and reasonable people would think it’s a bomb … you can get in trouble.
Sort of like shouting fire when there isn’t one.
I think the important part of this is that she chose to do this at a -very- public place with -no- advance warning or other way of indicating what she was up to.
I think she was just completely clueless as to what sort of danger she’d be in, which points to some kind of arrogance. “I’m an artist! This will be a hell of a way to get my name out there.”
Yah. This was an obvious lack of common sense. You just don’t do this sort of shit. I’m totally for civil rights and usually think the police over reacted or that airport security is totally invasive … but in this case … I totally side with them. If I saw that thing on that girl I’d run to the nearest cop and report it.
Wow, nice job. I will also remind readers of last year’s Mooninite “bomb hoax” scare. The Boston city government is acutely sensitive to anything like this.
Thanks! I guess my money is going to something useful since I can at least pull up statutory codes with a few clicks of the mouse now – hehehe :)
And I did do some more reading up on this hoax device stuff and found some pretty whacky stories. I can understand the city being extra sensitive because of it. And even though the close up picture of this girl’s sweatshirt makes the thingy look pretty lame, seriously, I’m sure it looked pretty frightening at a glance, at a distance, in an airport. I don’t blame them at all.