[boomboomsubban]

There is no reason to expect their procedures are legal, this thread is an example of government procedure shown to be illegal.

[orcs]

And also no reason to expect their procedures to be illegal either. True enough about the surveillance, but the two things aren't connected, just because one procedure was illegal doesn't make all government procedures illegal.

[boomboomsubban]

>And also no reason to expect their procedures to be illegal either

Being illegal would be a good reason for going to jail, which is the question you asked.

[orcs]

But they're not illegal so the point is moot. Also illegality does not mean jail. The severity of an illegal action dictates that.

[boomboomsubban]

>But they're not illegal so the point is moot

They aren't? We both agreed that procedure could be a illegal, what reason do you have to assume this procedure is legal?

[orcs]

Oh dear.

'Could be' and 'are' are two different things.

Where's your actual evidence they are illegal? You don't have any.

What reason do you have to assume this procedure is illegal? Other than some kind of irrelevant association with the surveillance program of a different part of the government proving to be illegal.

I'll gladly accept the procedure is illegal provided with proof it is, so... over to you.

[boomboomsubban]

I'm not stating that the procedure is illegal. Having never read the procedural guide or the relevant law, I fully confess my ignorance on the subject.

You are stating that it is legal, and from my point of view your only reason is that the accused said they were following procedure. As following procedure doesn't show legality, why are you certain it is legal?