I agree with both J.O.A and dirk. The death pentaly seems like something, I feel, that wouldn't exactly fit into the model of asgardia. With new laws and new structures to justice being set such a thing as the death pentaly brings back an old feeling of how things are. We should strive to be seen as a council or civilization that has a more just way of justice. Taking the life of an individual only makes since to me if a life was taken by the individual in question, but we must show restraint. May the will of the people be heard, but my opinion stands as following. No death pentaly, severe sentencing.

I honestly don't see how the death penalty would fix anything really. It should be about a fair and honest trial. It should be about doing the right thing. And if we go around and kill, then we're no better than the corrupted ourselves.

The death penalty has no place in a civilised society, certainly not in what we are creating, a new society based on enlightenment not coercion and punishment.

This idea is a bit much and pointless as well, rather than ending the lives of any corrupt government official whether federal or state. It makes far more sense to simply remove said person from their position, revoke their citizenship, and send them back to Earth. It avoids the need for any prisons and the need for funding to care for them while they are in prison. It also avoids passing the buck to some Earth bound prison and making Asgardia look as if it can not keep it's own house in order!

The fact that so many of our citizens still follow that institutionalized way of thought scares me in regards to what Asgardia will become. Listen folks, we do not need such a harsh, ineffective, and perverse method such as the death penalty to deal with corruption or any other issue. It does not work and is solely for the pleasure of those sick individuals who thought up such a sadistic idea. Let's not taint what could be a beautiful place with the sins of individuals who can only be described as being evil

Revoking citizenship and returning to Earth is something only really considerable for those who first signed up. Being born in Asgardia would open up headaches with this policy. It certainly doesn't avoid passing the buck to Earth, or make it look like Asgardia can keep it's own house in order.

Hello Eyer, Actually it works in all situations, and it does help to avoid passing the buck and making Asgardia look like it is not able to keep it's own house in order. By revoking their citizenship you eliminate that person as an Asgardian responsibility and by returning them to Earth. You allow said person to continue their life in their native land. You also avoid the issue of where to house said person were you to send them to prison. Asgardia will need the capability to deal with any situation that may arise within it's borders. In order to be truly independent and by sending prisoners to Earth for punishment and incarceration. You project the idea that Asgardia can not handle housing prisoners, now of course violent prisoners should be sent to prisons elsewhere considering the environment Asgardia will someday be in. But corrupt government officials do not always fit the description of violent offenders and it would take far more money to prosecute, relocate, and house said offenders. Than it would to simply revoke their citizenship and relocate them back to their native lands and allow their government in said land to decide if sending said person to prison is necessary or not.

While space around Asgardia is vast, space inside it's walls will not be so none can or should be spared for prisons. Any Asgardian prison would have to be built on good ole terrafirma. In order to eliminate the risk having prisoners aboard a space station!

That was kind of my point, Jason, those born in Asgardia would have no "Earth home" to be returned to. So quite how this is supposed to "work in all situations" still merits explainations.

As does how passing on the problem to someone else counts as not passing the buck or how revocation of citizenship absolves of responsibility.

Space is vast, indeed, you capitlise on this by building prison facilities. Then you eliminate the risk of having prisoners on a space station. They're in a prison. Attempts to build this on Earth, where space is not so abundant, is not the most sensible move considerable.

Hello Eyer, First off Jason mentioned a penalty which suggests he was referring to the idea of subjecting the corrupt to the death penalty, Second, while future generations born in Asgardia may not have homes of their own on Earth. They most certainly will have relatives on Earth. With whom they maybe able to stay until they find a place of their own, Third the whole idea is NOT to bring the drama of Earth into space, Filling it with prisons does just that. Therefore the simplest way to ensure that corrupt person can no longer affect Asgardia negatively is to. Relieve him/her of their post, citizenship, and send them packing. Any solution we think of has to be inline with the philosophy Asgardia has been or will be founded on. In order for Asgardia to be different than the current nations of Earth and not repeat the same mistakes they made. By revoking their citizenship all we would be doing is freeing them to either go back to being whatever nationality they were before becoming Asgardian citizens or starting over in a new nation if they choose.

Depending on the impact their corruption had on the nation I would not even suggest wasting the funds on building a prison to house them in or the funds to care for them while they are there. The entire idea of a prison system is out dated anyway what would we be doing collecting bad guys and gals!!? Oh, and, I never said it would absolve the corrupt of their responsibility. However, I am saying that we should consider what type of corruption should be met with the type of punishment suggested. If someone is just guilty of taking bribes or kickbacks wasting the funds to build a prison to house them is simply ridiculous. But if they are responsible for loss of life either directly or indirectly then sure punish them

I fail to notice Jason supporting such a stance in this thread, or any other to which he has contributed. Although it is truely beyond my mandate, I suggest the "penalty" to which he refers be that which you had suggested - exile from Asgardia and return to Earth.

Having relatives in a country isn't an obligation within itself for that country to accept someone for import, let alone someone that problematic the previous country is attempting to get rid of them. Basing future generations acceptance onto the surface of the Earth based on this would be incredibly unwise. Ofc, ultimately we all know how gravity works, and once they're down there it's a little too late - but that general trend of thinking is most alarming. It could quite possibly constitute an act of interference with the natural operations of the nations of Earth, and on those grounds alone be unacceptable. We need to limit ourselves from acting against their wishes, especially where it directly involves them.

Although the idea is to prevent the dramas from unfolding into space, and much of the cause of it should be resolved before it actually happens, but infraction is inevitable, and not everything is possible to be addressed with regards to adjustment of long term behaviours, for possibly more serious things than a personality defect. I'm not suggesting space be filled with prisons, I'd really consider our requirements to possibly not require a full long term facility - hence suggestion of outsourcing excess space to Earth. It takes care of our problem and lessens theirs. This is the responsibility of which I speak, Asgardia's for that of it's citizens. Simply returning them, or in the case of those born in space dumping them on the Earth simply shirks this.

To be able to attribute resources for the long term habitational facilities then a prison complex would be a trivial matter. Another trivial matter to solve would be that of corruption, by enacting a governmental type of direct democracy. It's difficult to bribe everyone, and should it be managed it's likely to be cost-ineffective.

Hello Eyer, Most Asgardian citizens have dual citizenship so, by returning them to their native lands there would not be any problem. Their native land is not going to bar their entry nor can it without good reason. As for those people who will eventually be born in Asgardia.You could allow them to keep their citizenship but send them to the island nation I mentioned to face punishment and eliminate the need for a prison in space, the funding to build it, pay the staff working in such a dangerous environment, and the transfer of Earthly problems into space! Acting against the wishes of the nations of Earth? How would we be doing that? When have they expressed any opposition to my idea? When were they even made aware of my idea? I am thinking never unless they are keeping incredibly close tabs on this project which I doubt.

Asgardia has a responsibility to it's citizens alright and that includes them all not just certain folks. If Asgardia were not to remove someone who's corruption may pose a threat to the other citizens then, Asgardia would have failed those citizens and for what one person!!? That kind of favoritism has no place in the leading of a nation. So, you treat those who do wrong appropriately you do not baby them. You think my thought process is alarming!!? That is a hoot, coming from someone who honestly believes that every possible eventuallity can be accounted for by nothing more than good design alone!

Your thought process is so hazardous that I can assure you that it if placed into practice would get a person/people killed! It is far too idealistic and assumptious to be safe

When have they expressed any opposition to my idea? When were they even made aware of my idea?

They haven't. This is precisely the sort of reason it'd be a poor idea, at least until you've checked with them. I can't see them being incredibly responsive, at least positively. The dual citizen citizens was never an issue, I don't seem to understand why you would require to focus on this, the problematic example cited repeatedly was those born in space. You'd still need to pay for a prison to be built on the Earth, and that would likely cost more than space considering how much more resources there are in space and the fact that we would require to be obtaining them to be getting residential facilities to account for our citizens to a scale to warrent prison facilities. You would still require staff etc - although I still think almost everything can be automated. It'd certainly represent an easier option for escape being on an island - that you still haven't done a feasiblity study on obtaining. Interesting to see how you reconcile the special 200 people with homes on this island with a prison - considering the island isn't likely to be big enough for 200 people really, and the supporting infrastructure they'll sensibly require. The tourist industry for functional prisons on remote islands otherwise populated by 200 elites must be booming. I don't see why more people haven't done this. And there's a difference between allowing Earthly problems traversing space, and using Earth as a dumping ground for our problems. The only commonality they share would be that it isn't right to allow.

I said nothing of babying, I said nothing failure to uphold responsibilities to other citzens by way of failure to remove that which cannot be adjusted from "disfunctional", and certainly do not advocate any form of favouritism. It should be interesting to find out how you draw these conclusions. Yes, your thought processes are definitely alarming. And certainly good design is capable of accounting for every eventually - that and you not even noticing it doing it are the hallmarks of a good design. That's basically what makes the entire premise of human existence in space - or even visiting feasible. Not shortsighted misunderstandings and irrational fears.

Hello Eyer, Why would I have any need to consult the other nations regarding my idea? Also how in the world do you figure my not having done so makes the idea a poor one!!? I addressed the issue of future generations and how my suggestion would affect them and there are no problems with it. The joke is on you I actually have looked into what it would cost to buy an island for personal reasons. So, I know doing so is feasible, I also know that a chain of islands would also serve the same purpose and still cost far less than your suggestion! Actually buding a prison on Earth is and will always be cheaper than building one in space. You would have to protect the prison and it's inmates from the same threats you would have to protect Asgardia from! Which naturally will increase the construction costs. Automating a average size house is expensive, automating a prison facility would be three to four times as expensive and that's not factoring in maintanence costs! Which would make the prison a huge money sink and require you to sentence criminals to absurdly long prison sentences so it recoups the money spent on automating it and maintaining the systems.

Listen, my way of thinking is far less dangerous than you wish to believe, in fact, your way of thinking is far, far, far more dangerous than mine. I am realistic, while you are idealistic, my way of thinking minimizes loss of life, yours contributes to it! I recognize the inability that even the most well designed systems to account and address every possible occurence. You dismiss the idea as nonsense and mistakenly believe all will be fine. Remember that famous ship, the Titanic the one that sank during it's maiden voyage? More people died that night than survived because everyone aboard thought like you do and failed to properly prepare for the possibility that the ship might sink. Well, the ssme thing will happen if you build any facility in space and place your trust in the design of said facility alone to be enough to avert disaster!

Irrational fears!!!? Let me get this straight, worrying about when not if but when things like severe solar activity, gamma ray bursts, and other space threats as well as the threat from the massive security breach that would be caused by having an unpaid workforce in charge of critical systems will appear is irrational!!!!!? Sorry for this but what have you been smoking and where can I buy some? You sound like a kid who lives in a perpetual dreamland where everything works out. Wake up and step into reality not everything works out as planned

Listen Eyer, Ideas like yours only have a place in the pages of science fiction stories. If your ideas were ever implemented in reality, the lives of the citizens would be placed in harm's way and you have no right to gamble with the lives of others. If you want to risk your own then fine but, do not presume to have the right to risk those of others simply because you are confident your ideas would work

You would need to consult a nation before enacting an idea, if this idea expressly involves them and your idea expects things of them. Prior to this consultation it is a poor idea as it bases on an unknown variable, which if accurately analysed doesn't yeild a particularly high probability of selection for acceptance by any right thinking nation.

You would also need to do a feasibility study on obtaining an island, setting up the prison infrastructure, the supporting infrastructure, and the applicable running costs for. Doing this on an island you also expect to be habitating 200 people on, you'd also need to add the costs of the feasibility study for that into account.

The joke is most definitely on you, buying an island is not even ½ the battle, one that doens't flood regularly with the tide and a large enough expanse to build for 200 heads, and associated infrastructure, isn't going to be cheap. Then it will cost possibly double that in getting the materials there, half of that again on materials. This doesn't buy architechts, civil engineers, project managers, builders, labourers etc. You exceeded the cost of my suggestion before obtaining the island. Vastly. And this mitigates the cost of building a prison in space, when you have a nigh-on infinite stack of resources of all types, anything you want to do is just how long it takes to do it. Then you don't have to try and turn it into a tool of generating revenue and it can stay true to it's purpose instead of corrupting itself and all that pass through by recieve more harm than good as a result. Things like maintainence costs are not really a thing, as generally automation suggests for the most part it should take care of itself. You don't spend money automating this, as similar systems from other facilities will be readily repurposed, as is the point of designing in a modular fashion. And another feather in the hat for open source development. You only waste effort doing something once, then snap together like lego. When it comes to automating a house, if you know what you're doing it's actually remarkably simple and can be done with COTS hardware reasonably cheaply. You can build it all from scratch for cheaper than you'd imagine too.

I don't listen to text, your way of thinking is far more dangerous than you seem capable of comprehending or your narrow scope of focus allows for. You may consider me "idealistic" - suggestion of this to most who actually know me should be interesting for you to receive their mockery, something else that should require youtubing for prosperity - I can assure you few have a pessimistic streak wider or deeper than mine. Where you see this discarded it is because all potential concerns have been ratified in this section. And if I cannot provide one, let alone multiple failure points - and I'm really good at breaking things, it's the only thing I do better than and what allows me to be so good at solving problems then it means there are viable solutions. Within reach. And a more than probable chance of succcess.

Your "way of thinking" does nothing to minimise loss of life, only increase dependance on revenue. My way of thinking most certainly is incredibly centric on prevention of loss of life, and has featured as core principle of several concepts. I'm quite up to date with methodologies, techniques, tools, and equipment currently in use associated with doing so and should be reasonably competent in at least outlining of sane mitigation strategies and techniques for almost any given situation - and ultimately this is likely to depend very little on my output in this regard. This concept of good design isn't an arrogant thumb in the nose of the icebergs of space as we destin ourselves to become the first space titanic, it's simple recognition that every "challenge" that exists can be met and overcome, as most already have been, with ease. With mitigation strategies in place to minimise loss of life in the unlikely event of failure, which are also consequence of good design.

When sat behind a five meter thick radiation shield, worrying about gamma rays that will only penetrate a few CM of a material as dense as NiFe, let alone mostly bounce off the 6 cm titaium skin on the outside, and never get near the one on the inside, it's highly irrational to anyone that is familiar with the likes of FLUKA and MCNPX. Or even someone that understands the basic working properties of the radiation they seem determined to be so scared of. There really isn't anything we can't do anything about, given sufficient preparatory time - and there's certainly no hope of building anything significant tomorrow. We have this time.

You've still yet to offer any valid evidence that an "unpaid workforce" would be possible to corrupt, or would be unwise for placement in any significant position. Surely there is some reason behind the almost religous finactical cling to such flawed concepts. You have certainly not offered any validation for why the act of attribution of monetary compensation for their priceless asset of time is any assurance of suitability for purpose in terms of competencies - existing systems commonly suggest otherwise - and why it magically provides prevention of them wishing to abuse their position to cause harm. Existing systems commonly prove otherwise there, too.

You don't smoke what I've got, and you can't buy it. It's all around you, you just have to open your eyes and look. Everything does work out as planned, or your plans were pretty unrealistic. Learn from this. I definitely don't seem to have problems with waking up, either, and you should find it disturbing this kid is vastly better educated.

@Brandon7

Their native land is not going to bar their entry nor can it without good reason.

Criminal conviction is such a reason. There is no international system to handle exile, a sentence not currently used by any nation to my knowledge. Obama's efforts to deport Guantanamo Bay detainees is the road map for what exiling citizens will be like. Every Asgardian citizen sentenced to exile would become a bargaining chip for the country we try to deport them to. Why do something they don't have to for free?

It would be easier to sentence incarceration, then negotiate a treaty with a terrestrial nation to hold our prisoners for us and require former prisoners to pay their own way back to Asgardia. That would be de facto exile without diplomatic repercussions and would be the cheapest way to incarcerate anyway.