NationStates Jolt Archive

For those who aren't familiar with Judge Dredd, it is a comic book where far in the future after a nuclear war has wiped most cities off the planet, various surviving world governments use what resources are left to create giant cities capable of holding hundreds of millions of people. In the US crime becomes so out of control due to so many people living in poverty in one area the police becomes obsolete, therefore a new type of "police force" is created. They are called The Judges. Street Judges are judge, jury, and executioner all in one. They have the power to give you a trial right on the spot.

Would you approve of such a system? If so explain why you would as well if you do not.

No. Too open to corruption. Have you read many JDs over the years? Loadsa corrupt judge stories, right from street judge to the top.

As an aside, Anthrax's song about Dredd is ace :D

I would not approve that if the judge is a human being, yet AI if led to discover everything itself, would be a perfect candidate.

America's looking in that direction even now. Everytime someone talks about the UN the NeoCons are laughing and saying "I am the Law" anyways.

I would not approve that if the judge is a human being, yet AI if led to discover everything itself, would be a perfect candidate.
Read Asimov. You'll know why AI could not be beneficial in hive mind form. :)

Please tell me this is a joke.

I think we have to look at the pros and cons.

pros: Faster and more effecient, doesn't waste taxpayers' money, their presence would deter dozens of crimes

cons: Street Judges could very easily take advantage of their status, too much control over the civilian population, mistakes would be easy to make

Seems like the cons outweigh the pros on this one.

I'm not in favour of such a system since it's easily abused and corrupted. Nobody should have the dictatorial authority to be all 3 powers in one.

Read Asimov. You'll know why AI could not be beneficial in hive mind form. :)
3 Rules were flawed. And if AI is tought by humans, it'll eventually develop a "new understanding", so it should be led to discover everything itself. Though I have no idea how this can be provided... But fiction has no limits has it?

I think we have to look at the pros and cons.

pros: Faster and more effecient, doesn't waste taxpayers' money, their presence would deter dozens of crimes

cons: Street Judges could very easily take advantage of their status, too much control over the civilian population, mistakes would be easy to make

Seems like the cons outweigh the pros on this one.
Since when is fast a pro when it comes to justice?

am i required to imagine that im living in the lawless slums of this mega-city of the distopian future? if so, then YUP, id go for anything that might make a bit of order on the streets.

if its NOW, no way in hell, i like the requirement of proof before guilty verdict, plus the possibility of appeal.

Not in the slightest.

how abute a slightly different but similar system...
where everyone has some power but no one has that much

The entire point of JD was to rail against such a system, one of giving one person too much power. Even a straight-up by-the-books completely incorruptable judge like Dredd was a cold bastard who didn't care about extenuating circumstances etc.

Since when is fast a pro when it comes to justice?
Depends on which side are you on: receiving or dealing.

Depends on which side are you on: receiving or dealing.
It's not justice if you kill the wrong person.

It's not justice if you kill the wrong person.
Right. If it is justice, it's better to have it fast.

I'd do it.
I'd want proof not hearsay and a lie detector for when I have to take someone's word for it.

I do think there is a case for this, there are many cases where due to legal reasons (method of obtainment) evidence that conculsivly proves guilt is not presented. Or when the Rights have not be stated correctly, there are lots of these legal loopholes.
I have been on the jury of 7 cases, in a couple the evidence proved they were an accomplice not nessersarily the commiter of crime, but we could only say they were inocennt as there was reasonable doubt. I would really have liked to have the option of guilt on a lesser charge. (One case was murder and he laughed at us. Some wanted to find him guilty even though they agreed the were not sure he or his freind did it).

Judge Dread sucks!

Since when is fast a pro when it comes to justice?

Everything else being equal, "fast" is a pro when it comes to justice.

That being said, I would prefer anarchy to a system where 1 person was judge, jury and executioner.