Slashdot Mirror


French Man Sentenced To Two Years In Prison For Visiting Pro-ISIS Websites (theverge.com)

According to French media, a court in the department of Ardeche on Tuesday sentenced a 32-year-old man in France to two years in prison for repeatedly visiting pro-ISIS websites -- even though there was no indication he planned to stage a terrorist attack. Police raided his house and found the man's browsing history. They also found pro-ISIS images and execution videos on his phone, personal computer, and a USB stick, an ISIS flag wallpaper on his computer, and a computer password that was "13novembrehaha," referencing the Paris terrorist attacks that left 130 people dead. Slashdot reader future guy shares with us an excerpt from The Verge's report: In court, the man argued that he visited the sites out of curiosity. "I wanted to tell the difference between real Islam and the false Islam, now I understand," he said, according to FranceBleu. But the man reportedly admitted to not reading other news sites or international press, and family members told the court that his behavior had recently changed. He became irritated when discussing religion, they said, and began sporting a long beard with harem pants. A representative from the Ardeche court confirmed to The Verge that there was no indication that the man had any plans to launch an attack. In addition to the two-year prison sentence, he will have to pay a 30,000 euros (roughly $32,000) fine.

14 of 414 comments (clear)

  1. Thoughtcrime by mspohr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it; moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.

    —Part I, Chapter I, Nineteen Eighty-Four

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:Thoughtcrime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet another country loses to terrorism and fearmongering. What a shame. I've been to France before, it used to be a nice place.

    2. Re:Thoughtcrime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Frankly, possessing that shouldn't be illegal either. Making it, committing child abuse, yes, those should be illegal, but just having files on your computer should never be a crime. Murder is illegal, but videos of people getting murdered are perfectly okay.

    3. Re:Thoughtcrime by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You stupid sack of shit, if the demand for child porn is destroyed, there will be no incentive for child
      porn to be made, and thus no children will be victimized by being used to make child porn.

      Look how well that worked out for drugs.

      Locking people up for small amounts of marijuana sure destroyed demand for marijuana oh wait...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Thoughtcrime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You stupid sack of shit, if the demand for child porn is destroyed, there will be no incentive for child
      porn to be made, and thus no children will be victimized by being used to make child porn.

      Yeah, that's why prohibition was such a success! Outlawing alcohol destroyed the demand; nobody ran speakeasies, or hauled carloads full of moonshine around...

    5. Re:Thoughtcrime by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      thus no children will be victimized by being used to make child porn.

      Banning it makes this problem worse. If child porn was legalized and regulated, it could be made with cgi animation, adult actors posing as children, etc. There is no evidence that viewing child porn causes the consumer to commit more child abuse, and some evidence that it is preventative. In Japan, pedophiles can buy child-sized sex dolls, and although data is limited, it appears that this reduces their desire for real children by providing an alternative release.

      Our treatment of pedophiles is based on knee-jerk populism, not scientific evidence. We often punish pedophiles just for seeking psychological help. It would be harder to design a dumber system even if we tried. We really should think of the children.

  2. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, if he didn't want to blow things up, this will change his mind quick.

  3. Disturbing, but practical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you see mosquito larvae infesting a pond, do you kill the larvae or do you wait until they grow into mosquitoes and bite you before swatting them?
    If you see a smoldering ember in a tinder-dry forest, do you stamp it out before it destroys homes, or do you wait to see which way the wind blows?
    If you see someone falling into mental illness, do you treat them early or do you wait until the illness has gripped them and who knows what happens?

    It is a very interesting ethical question that this poses. If the guy's family noticed changes, if the guy admits he wasn't consuming any other media other than pro-jihadist propaganda, and if the guy showed outward signals of becoming fundamentalist, wouldn't you act now rather than wait for him to become a major problem?

    1. Re:Disturbing, but practical by richardellisjr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He's not a mosquito, he's not a smoldering ember, he's likely not even a mentally ill person. Imprisoning anyone for researching alternative viewpoints (even if you believe to be evil) is wrong and you don't punish people for it. This man did nothing other than basically research and as far as anyone can tell had no plans to do anything further.
      In my 20s I downloaded a copy of the big book of mischief. I never tried to make anything from the book, probably good I didn't or I might not be here now, however by the logic that convicted this guy I could have faced years in prison... for curiosity.
      No matter which way you cut it this is wrong.

  4. Re:Well that's terrifying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    2) it's a two year sentence, besides pissing off a bunch of people, what purpose does this serve?

    Telling every citizen that Big Brother is watching them, and that if they know what's good for them they'd better be careful to only read from government-approved news sources, and fap to Church-approved pr0n.

    And giving Trump/Pompeo/Sessions/Pence a legislative proposal to one-up Theresa May's snooper's charter by this time next year.

  5. Stupid move by manu0601 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The smart way of dealing with this is to monitor the suspect.

    Now he will have a good time completing his training in prison, where he will be in touch with real specialists

  6. Re:missing info... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    so what happens in two years? he's rehabilitated?

  7. Re:Well that's terrifying by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can't change a person's ideologies by imprisoning them

    Yes you can. Just you watch how that man thinks when he gets out in two years.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  8. Re:Random observation by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bullshit. The TSA never looks at documents.