From: yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung)
Subject: Re: Locarno's actions (spoiler 1st duty)
Organization: R-Node Public Access UNIX System (416-636-2026) - 24 hrs
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 15:03:50 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.144205.1@kscdl1.ksc.nasa.gov> 
lockhart@kscdl1.ksc.nasa.gov writes:
>Amos Yung         
>yung@r-node.gts.org 
>writes:
>
>{STUFF DELETED}
>>Had Picard told the admiral the truth, Locarno *will* lie. He said so        
>>himself. Besides, the *intention* of lying and misleading is the same.
>>Punishment (in our society) punishes the action, not the intention, but
>>judgement (as what we are doing now) should include intention.
>
>Yes, but I lie all the time to get out of trouble.  As I've gotten older,
>I've learned to lie in such a way so as to not get caught. ("No, honey,
>I just had to work late...") Does that make it right?  No.  Does that 
>make it realistic?  Yes.  

I don't recall the question of realistic or not ever comes into the question.
Lying to get out of trouble? I find it all too real in everyday's life.

>But if we punished everyone who told lies, the
>court dockets would be filled to overflowing!  And as for misleading and
>lying being the same, go talk to a criminal defense lawyer and ask him
>how he defends a patently guilty client.  
I thought I had made it clear..... The court generally punishes an action,
very rarely an intention since they are difficulut to prove. I have no
dispute with that. But when people like us (common folks voicing an 
opinion) judging whether an action is right or wrong, intention behind
an action should be taken into account as well.

>Or are you saying that only the
>innocent deserve a defense?
> 

I don't see how the things that I said lead to such an conclusion. But,
imo, the guilty party should have a chance to tell their side of a story
but not to be able to forward an innocent plead. If I am not mistaken,
this is how our legal supposed to work, ideally speaking of course.


>
>Intentions *should* count for something, though.  In a case where Locarno
>et.al. decided something like "Let's get rid of that sniveling rat Josh
>and here's how...", we're talking out and out murder.  In a case where,
>(as this seemed to be, otherwise Weasley would've narced from the outset)
>some little snot-nosed academy hotshots opted to show off, we're talking
>poor judgement.  As I said, Josh knew from the outset what the risks were,
>and so I don't think the others should be punished for Josh's FU.  A much
>worse scenario would've been if Nova Squadron's FU had caused the deaths
>of innocent bystanders.  If you examine the risks of being a bystander,
>you don't think death is going to enter into it.  It's got nothing to do 
>with net worth.  It's tragic when *anyone* dies, but if you know the
>risks and are willing to take a chance anyway, I think it's part of your
>personal choice.
Hm.... I think I get what you are saying. You are saying Josh was responsible
for his own death therefore Locarno should not be punish for that. I don't
see it this way. I think Locarno was punished for *HIS* acti and all its
consquence. Within the court system ,Locarno will have the chance to point
out that Josh was responsible for his own death and Locarno should only
be punish for his participation in a forbidden star ship(or whatever it is)
manuever. The court (in all its mighty wisdom :^), will de whether this
claim was valid o One way or the other, lying should not be consider
as acceptable defense..



>{STUFF DELETED}
>>It is the attitude of "what good will  that do?" that I found uncomfortable.
>
>And I still maintain "what good will that do?"  

Does this attitude apply only to this case (the dead bear a certain amount
of responsibility) or is a general principle? If for the latter, I ask you
again, what good will *any* confession do, the death will always remain
dead.

>In my innocent, immature
>youth, I screwed up plenty, and sometimes in a major way.  By your standards,
>I'd be rotting in San Quentin now. ;-)

Nothing personal, but if you screw up that royally, you should without a 
doubt receive your fair share of punishment. The fact that you were young
should be considered in the .....er.... sentencing. But that cannot and
should not exempt all your irresponsible action (if you had done any, that
is>.

>
>>Actually, no. Wesely and StarFleet doesn't matter that much to me because
>>they are only part of a TV show.
>
>Yes, but art imitates life, eh? :-)

Is that cannon? :^)

>-- 
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> |                     $ @disclaimer opinions are mine                        |
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Susy Lockhart            |  " I like to think big.  If you're going to     |
> | EG & G Florida           |    be thinking anyway, you might as well        |
> | Kennedy Space Center     |    think big."                 Donald Trump     |
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> |                  email:  lockhart@kscdl3.ksc.nasa.gov                      |
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amos Yung          | Macintosh Jr.: The power to crush the other kid.
yung@r-node.gts.org| 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current