[ExI] Gender-Neutral Side Note

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 9:49 AM spike jones via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> A record-keeping violation is a misdemeanor.

There are cases where record-keeping violations are felonies.

> A New York court claims record keeping-violations are felonies if they are perpetrated to cover a second crime.  That politician was not tried or convicted of any second crime that anyone knows of.

And he didn't have to be.  Mere intent - not conviction - is enough to
justify the felony upgrade, under the specific laws the prosecution
charged Trump with in this case.  Therefore, under the laws as
written, all that needed to be proven is that he intended to commit a
second crime, not that he actually did so, let alone that he be
charged or convicted of it.

If you have a problem with that, take it up with those who write New
York's laws.  It's hardly the only example of intent alone being a
factor in such laws, though IIRC, all such cases in the US today are
only modifiers to some other charge, never prosecutable without some
other criminal conduct (at least some other thing that, by itself,
would be at least a misdemeanor).

Stop dancing around the issue and pretending that he needed to be
actually charged or convicted of the second crime.  That's not what
those laws say.  If you think that's unjust, say so, but "they should
not" is worlds apart from "they are not".