A good you can be there is just ever unedifying trash being broadcast.

A good you can be there is just ever unedifying trash being broadcast.

The real question is instead what’s the prohibited conduct for which an individual is called to answer under this criminal activity?

We could just just just take, for example, Campbell’s very own exemplory instance of the criminal activity of ‘operating a radio receiver with no licence’, by which he exposits the offence-defence difference. Footnote 57 How do we see whether the lack of a licence should always be the main crime’s offense, or perhaps the offense should rather be compared to running a radio receiver, susceptible to the defence of having a licence? Once we understand, Campbell’s solution would be to search for the pro tanto ( in the parlance, ‘prima facie’) wrongful conduct. This included the possible lack of a licence, because there is absolutely absolutely absolutely nothing incorrect with running a radio receiver as a result. But why don’t we imagine just what the thinking we encountered above could do using this instance. Perhaps running a radio receiver is certainly not an excellent or activity that is valuable all contexts. Possibly there are also basic reasons why you should avoid running a radio.

good you could be that there’s only ever unedifying trash being broadcast. 继续阅读“A good you can be there is just ever unedifying trash being broadcast.”