|
Just absolutely no. Can you imagine the kind of person who would go in for that kind of job? For the power of sitting in judgement over fellow citizens? Heeeeeeeell no. Judges are bad enough. The right to be tried by a jury of one's peers is the only realistic check against the utter corruption of justice that I know of.
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
blowfish posted:There are plenty of countries that both are more democratic and less obsessed with the concept of a jury than the US. Stupidity is less scary than corruption when it comes down to life and death. Having a political class that has sole right of judgement and can execute people or lock them up for life is practically asking for de facto plutocracy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:National Service. Young people must give 2 years to the government, an option of which is to be a professional juror. Fill the jury rolls with the innocent and idealistic, those who haven't been corrupted yet. Plus its a great head start on a profession in law/government! I like it. It allows for better legally educated jurors without providing an indefinite Judgedreddship. It also balances the inherent traditionalism of a legal code with the more progressive minds of younger generations. Through the same mechanism, it instills the sense of the right and responsiblity of citizens to be the ultimate arbiters of justice, as the jury system attempts to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
blowfish posted:And yet, most of Europe uses juries in much fewer cases if at all while being less of a plutocracy than the US. I see that as being a dangerous risk. It might not be going super bad for them right now, but it's a weakness that can end up really biting you in the rear end, as I think history shows. What if nationalists or some group like the nazis decided to start stacking the judgehoods? Surely there are barriers to things like that, but we already have enough problems with super entrenched politicians without also making the same kind of positions literal arbiters of justice.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
tsa posted:Seriously? The idea of a volunteer jury is one of the worst things I have head in a long time. Like someone else said imagine the selection bias that would result. Basically imagine the sort of person that likes the tipping system because of the power it gives the person over the server-those are the sorts of people that would choose the juror path. It would be an rear end in a top hat magnet. I can see several ways around the selection bias issue. Don't make it a choice but rather a random selection with an opt out, for example. I disagree about there being no justification for national service. It increases engagement with and a sense of partnership with one's government, among other benefits. I can understand an ideological indisposition to the idea though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 19:01 |
|
|
computer parts posted:This is effectively how the system operates today. Right, except that we're talking about an assignment via national service.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 23:15
|
|