Jury - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

webuster · 02-24-2003, 06:07 PM

A good point was brought up once- should jury's have public randomnly chosen members, or trained individuals. I think individuals should be trained, however, emotion and peoples ideas of what is justified in crime, would dissappear, it would just be straightforward. They should have different people- Crime Victims, Mothers, Homosexuals, Psychologists, all groups. That way they still have free will, but then the narrowminded will be rooted out.
I think The Jury should consist of thirty people, three groups of ten, each go away and come to conclusions, then get together and debate the result, it'll take longer, but justice will feel more justified, as though the proper punishment was given.

Halex · 02-24-2003, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by webuster
They should have different people- Crime Victims, Mothers, Homosexuals, Psychologists, all groups. That way they still have free will, but then the narrowminded will be rooted out.

Sounds good to me.

webuster · 02-24-2003, 06:19 PM

I think the whole senate and representative should be gotten rid off, apart from things the public couldn't handle, like a budget or disaster relief funds. However, an election, with all the people voting, should take place, for issues which people feel strongly about or change their lives. They shouldn't however, be allowed to vote on biased topics, if a vote for lowering taxes happens it'll always pass, and the country ran into the ground. But, haveing votes would mean runaway rogue politicians like Bush can't gain control of the country and send it into turmoil. It should also happen in the UK. In fact, maybe we should start up Government parties, with completely new ambitions, or groups to overthrow the current way countries are ran, and gain lots of support, and overthrow the system!

~Tropical Punch 19~ · 02-24-2003, 06:39 PM

no way. if you did that than everyone would agree right away and nobody would be able to see a diffeent poin tof veiw. plus it is a great oppertuniy and honor to be randomly chosen. You are helping to decide the future of another human.

-*Leah*- · 02-24-2003, 07:19 PM

Seems like you thought that through well, and I think that would work just as good or better than the system we have right now. I like the idea of a having an "offender" or crime victum being on the jury, I think that having their "two-sense" put in would help out a lot.

webuster · 02-25-2003, 05:21 PM

Tropical Punch, I agree people sometimes might pass everything, for some cases, towns could still elect representatives, but there should be more representatives maybe, so more peoples views are put across then. However, would you want another human being responsible for you? That's what maybe wrong, humans are easily corrupted, they figure they have power why not use it.

02-24-2003, 06:07 PM	#1
webuster Member Senior Member Join Date: Aug 26, 2002 Posts: 2,150	Jury A good point was brought up once- should jury's have public randomnly chosen members, or trained individuals. I think individuals should be trained, however, emotion and peoples ideas of what is justified in crime, would dissappear, it would just be straightforward. They should have different people- Crime Victims, Mothers, Homosexuals, Psychologists, all groups. That way they still have free will, but then the narrowminded will be rooted out. I think The Jury should consist of thirty people, three groups of ten, each go away and come to conclusions, then get together and debate the result, it'll take longer, but justice will feel more justified, as though the proper punishment was given.

02-24-2003, 06:19 PM	#3
webuster Member Senior Member Join Date: Aug 26, 2002 Posts: 2,150	Democracy I think the whole senate and representative should be gotten rid off, apart from things the public couldn't handle, like a budget or disaster relief funds. However, an election, with all the people voting, should take place, for issues which people feel strongly about or change their lives. They shouldn't however, be allowed to vote on biased topics, if a vote for lowering taxes happens it'll always pass, and the country ran into the ground. But, haveing votes would mean runaway rogue politicians like Bush can't gain control of the country and send it into turmoil. It should also happen in the UK. In fact, maybe we should start up Government parties, with completely new ambitions, or groups to overthrow the current way countries are ran, and gain lots of support, and overthrow the system!

02-24-2003, 07:19 PM	#5
-Leah- Back for More Forum Fanatic Join Date: Jan 15, 2003 Posts: 10,563	Seems like you thought that through well, and I think that would work just as good or better than the system we have right now. I like the idea of a having an "offender" or crime victum being on the jury, I think that having their "two-sense" put in would help out a lot.
	__________________ i'm obsessive when just one thought of you comes up i'm aggressive just one thought of closing up you got me stressing, incessantly pressing the issue cause every moment gone you know I miss you :::::::::::::::::::::::::: this time please someone come and rescue me cause you on my mind it's got me losing it

02-25-2003, 05:21 PM	#6
webuster Member Senior Member Join Date: Aug 26, 2002 Posts: 2,150	Tropical Punch 19 Tropical Punch, I agree people sometimes might pass everything, for some cases, towns could still elect representatives, but there should be more representatives maybe, so more peoples views are put across then. However, would you want another human being responsible for you? That's what maybe wrong, humans are easily corrupted, they figure they have power why not use it.

02-24-2003, 06:39 PM	#4
~Tropical Punch 19~ Member Senior Member Join Date: Jul 19, 2001 Location: I'm a fly on Clay's wall Posts: 1,961	no way. if you did that than everyone would agree right away and nobody would be able to see a diffeent poin tof veiw. plus it is a great oppertuniy and honor to be randomly chosen. You are helping to decide the future of another human.