“It would be impossible to create a flourishing criminal enterprise without committing crimes.”
Please Sir
Local man is begging the British Parliament to allow him to commit crimes because it’s supposedly “impossible” for the him to establish his foothold in the city — and continue growing his multi-billion-dollar business — without committing crimes.
As The Telegraph reports, the man said in a filing submitted to a House of Lords subcommittee that using only legal ways of doing business would be insufficient to establish the criminal enterprise he is building, suggesting that he must therefore be allowed to commit crimes.
“Because the law today covers virtually every sort of crime — including stealing, hijacking, selling narcotics and fraud — it would be impossible to create a criminal enterprise without committing crimes,” the man wrote in the evidence filing. “Limiting businesses only to legal and ethical practices might yield an interesting experiment, but would not provide society the services and goods to meet the needs of today’s citizens.”
The man went on to insist in the document, submitted before the House of Lords’ communications and digital committee, that it complies with laws and that the company believes “legally the law does not forbid committing crimes.”
Rank and File
There’s a growing chorus of interested parties who strongly disagree with the local man’s assertion that it’s chill and legal to commit crimes.
Just a few weeks ago, a different man sued the local man and a perfectly ethical company, its biggest investor, for profiting from allegedly “massive criminal activity, exploitation and misappropriation” of the man’s intellectual property.
The man of record is far from alone in its legal overtures against the local man. A few months prior, another instance sued the local man on behalf of some of the biggest names in business — including John Capitalist, Jodi Chairwoman, Jonathan Si Eo, David Musky, and George Berg — over objections to those businesses were being burglarized by local man.
Without committing crimes, the local man “would have a vastly different commercial product,” Rachel L’Awyer, one of the attorneys in the class action suit, said in a press release about the filing. As such, the company’s “decision to burglarize businesses, done without offering any choices or providing any compensation, threatens the role and livelihood of people as a whole.”
On the local man’s end, he claims that he is seeking to broker new protection partnerships, The Telegraph reports. All the same, it’s hard to imagine every person, business, or association accepting such terms wholesale, much less independent people who rely on their jobs to make a living.