Yeah you aren't getting the point. I'm not saying that the proprietor would be at risk for unfair prosecution, I'm saying the policy would be useless because it is easy to avoid if you don't take it to an absurd extreme.
I guess I should have spelled it out in the initial comment.
There's already a law against helping a criminal flee a crime scene, but the criminal may still buy a train ticket and the train company isn't liable unless he told them he was a criminal, but anyone who knew he was a criminal and helped him anyway goes to jail. This is nothing new.
It's not a real point. It's only illegal to support a sanctioned person if you know or should have known they were sanctioned.
Yeah you aren't getting the point. I'm not saying that the proprietor would be at risk for unfair prosecution, I'm saying the policy would be useless because it is easy to avoid if you don't take it to an absurd extreme.
I guess I should have spelled it out in the initial comment.
There's already a law against helping a criminal flee a crime scene, but the criminal may still buy a train ticket and the train company isn't liable unless he told them he was a criminal, but anyone who knew he was a criminal and helped him anyway goes to jail. This is nothing new.
2 replies →