Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by matt_wulfeck 3725 days ago
Of course. We're able to make the distinction of being hacked versus someone crawling through an open window. If only jurors could be expected to do the same.
1 comments

What distinction is it that you're trying to make? Crawling into a building through an open window is no less of a crime than picking the locks. In fact: it's exactly the same crime.
Picking the locks is breaking and entering, going through an open window is illegal trespass, assuming you don't have to move any parts of the window. At least where I live. It depends on whether or not you have to use even the slightest amount of force to gain access. It also depends on your intent to commit a crime inside. If I'm looking for you because I've found your toddler wandering around outside and I open an unlocked door to call out your name, it isn't a crime. I'm not sure what happens if I pick a locked door in that situation, getting pretty contrived now. But let's say I heard your kid crying inside that you'd abandoned, it wouldn't be a crime to pick the lock and rescue him/her.
No, I don't think this is at all correct. Going through a window is breaking and entering.
Well, I didn't know, so I looked it up before posting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burglary

> Although rarely listed as an element, the common law required that "entry occur as a consequence of the breaking".[7] For example, if a wrongdoer partially opens a window with a pry bar—but then notices an open door, which he uses to enter the dwelling, there is no burglary under common law.

There are more results if you search for "breaking and entering", it was all pretty consistent.

See for instance Massachusetts model jury instructions, which are explicit that opening an unlocked door constitutes "breaking".
Yes, but that's using force to open the door, which was in my original claim about no force on an open window.

Reading that WP article again, turns out I was just considering the common law part. It later says:

> The common law definition has been expanded in most jurisdictions, such that the building need not be a dwelling or even a building in the conventional sense, physical breaking is not necessary, the entry does not need to occur at night, and the intent may be to commit any felony or theft.

So I'll give it to you for "physical breaking is not necessary", even though I don't actually know about the jurisdiction in question. (I didn't rtfa.)