I have major problems with laws that attempt to reinforce already-illegal acts by making illegal acts that might lead to them that also make illegal the same acts that wouldn't lead to illegality.

Let me see if I can parse this:

Reinforcing already-illegal acts by making further acts (that might lead to these already-illegal acts) illegal is wrong when these laws also make these acts illegal in situations when they don't lead to one of the original illegal acts.

To suggest an example:

1. Bank robbers might use body armour.
2. So make body armour illegal.
3. Despite there being good (legal) reasons for wearing body armour.
4. and robbing banks already being illegal.

How am I doing?

_________________________
-- roger