Making Crime Pay?

    A Dutch court has permitted a bank robber to claim the cost of a pistol used in a hold-up as a legitimate business expense. The €2000 ($3400) cost of the gun was set against the miscreant's gross proceeds of €6750, gained during his raid on a bank in the southern town of Chaam. A judge at Breda Criminal Court duly reduced his fine by the same amount. After all, a man has to make a living! Leendert De Lange, a spokesman for the Dutch prosecutors' service said the judge had followed sound legal precedents on the confiscation of criminal assets, explaining that: "You can compare criminal acts to normal business activities, where you must invest to make profits, and thus you have costs."
   This train of thought leads to some interesting possibilities before it derails completely. Based on that logic, shouldn't a terrorist, for instance, be recompensed for the cost of the explosives s/he uses in their deadly mission? Of course, if they don't think ahead they might do something stupid like strapping the incendiaries to themselves. Alas! they wouldn't be here themselves to claim those "business expenses". I would imagine, in that case, the judge (especially if you could get a Dutch judge to hear the case) would pay the amount to the terrorist's family. Keeping in mind that they did not actually commit the crime, they wouldn't have to do any time, so that would end up being cash, free and clear for them. Those explosives can really set a fellow back, you know, so we might be talking a pretty penny here, depending on how much was needed to take out their target. Just think - a martyr in the family, AND money to buy a new couch along with that big screen TV so they can watch coverage on other terrorist acts in comfort. I bet the very thought would bring a warm, fuzzy feeling to the Dutch judiciary.
   Isn't everything so much better when we all play nice with each other?