Aqu 12, 01 / Jan 12, 17 14:04 UTC

To protect the Asgardian nation, how should we treat...?  

Hello, my Dear Asgardians friends...

To protect the Asgardian nation, HOW SHOULD WE TREAT terrorism, espionage, homicide and leak of confidential information?

Bring your ideas!

Greetings,

Leonardo.

Aqu 14, 01 / Jan 14, 17 03:28 UTC

How we should treat;

Terrorism: Pity the poor tools.

Espionage: Anyone observing data security would already know the answers here and such shouldn't be much of an issue. Besides, the act of open source should make it difficult to steal public information.

The leak of confidential information: As a factor borne entirely of the human element of the system, this is the most dififcult to prevent. Logical solution would be to replace the human with AI but that's not practical in most cases at the moment. How we should treat this specifically shouldn't be written into the constitution - only that it's not good. The way to deal with problems should be flexible, as each case is different and over time things can change. Thusly the constitution should reflect this is unacceptable, and at a later date when defining other law of this nature the ministry of justice persue it further detail. From the general sentiments of what i've seen various educational responses should be mostly favoured.

Homicide: As above, it should refelct in the constitution that intentionally depriving another of life is to be unacceptable, but what quite should be done about it should be defined elsewhere. Again, the general sentiments here would reflect educational responses, and where unsucessful potentially longterm incarciration and I've even heard some talks of exile.

  Updated  on Aqu 14, 01 / Jan 14, 17 03:31 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time

Aqu 15, 01 / Jan 15, 17 22:04 UTC

Depends where we are....let's go to the future a bit and say we are on a space-station. We have finate air, water, food etc. And if a murder happends on Earth, usually is like in prison (or 30 years or whatever)....ar we willing to waste that much air and water on a murderer? That is locked up so he can't work safely?... I would say no. Death Penalty should exist,but not for every murder. Accidental murder happends. I am talking about premeditated and cold-blooded murder.

(And just for fun, should bring the quillotine back)

Kidding. But lethal injection or simply jettisoning the murderer into space shouldn't be excluded

Aqu 16, 01 / Jan 16, 17 02:32 UTC

Lets go to the future a bit... To be able to actually have materials in place to construct a station, we will of required to start mining the vastly abundant resources of space. At which point we have infinite air, we can break off oxygen from sillicon oxide and other similar processes for example, and infinite water - hydrogen is the most common element in the table, and easily combined with oxygen to make water. For food we can just build more farms, as there's more material up there than we can actually use... and that's just this solar system. If it came down to "locking someone up" then there's more than readily available resources to do so, in terms of building somewhere to do so, and keeping it well supplied.

As for punishments themselves, the general trend I have observed is to preferenticate an educational response where possible as a recognition that the factors that lead to "crime" should be mostly eliminated and the excuses for exhibiting such behaviours mostly mitigated. Ofc, this is not suitable for all cases, but a death sentence is something that seems to attract disaproval. A common argument is cases where later evidence emergences to confirm innocence - but after the sentence has been carried out it's a little late.

Jettison into space, although funny, would be irresponsible. We need to be clearing up debris, not adding to it - and then consider how things like "orbits" work - you'll meet it again. And a frozen corpse travelling at 1800m/s+ carries enough kinetic energy to be considered a problem in a collision.

Aqu 17, 01 / Jan 17, 17 19:10 UTC

I do believe we should have a death sentence (and again, jettisoning convicts would be more trouble than it's worth- lethal injection and subsequent recycling of the body would be more practical) in cases where guilt is obviously irredeemable- multiple corroborating eyewitnesses, DNA, and whatever evidence the state of the technology would allow in the future- and the crime fitting- terrorism, multiple homicide, and crimes of similar magnitude, especially if rehabilitation is extremely unlikely to succeed. Even with infinite resources, there will nevertheless be the need for human interaction in the rehabilitation process (assuming of course that we will work to rehabilitate, rather than simply incarcerate), and human time will likely be a limited resource. Therefore, one has to ask if it is worthwhile to waste time on "hopeless" cases.

Alternatively, we could have a two-track system, one oriented towards rehabilitation, and the other towards incarcerating criminals for a set time before transferring them to the former track, to act as a sort of buffer.

Aqu 18, 01 / Jan 18, 17 22:08 UTC

I stated in the thread regarding the death sentence that I am against it - you can read my rationale there (https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/criminal-justice-25/topic/should-the-death-penalty-be-allowed-in-as-garcia-1516/). But in regards to punishment for these acts that are particularly heinous in nature, they must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and then be locked up. No doubt.

However, we view Asgardia as a truly progressive nation, not only in terms of scientific innovation but in our view of society. They have committed crimes against our community, sure - but we should not resort to the barbarous and medieval method of killing them. We must deprive them of their freedom, but also seek to rehabilitate them using the best scientific approach. If they can not be rehabilitated, then we will deprive them of their freedom as punishment.

Aqu 24, 01 / Jan 24, 17 17:53 UTC

Actually, due to significant and steady advancements in automation, combined with steadily increasing populations "human time" should actually be remarkably abundant. There is really no reason why indefinite incarciration isn't a viable option.

It also means the "human time" spent in such an endeavour is minimalised.

The current trend I've noticed in these parts is to favour an educational/rehabilitaional response(https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/criminal-justice-25/topic/punishment-vs-rehabilitation), as opposed to a punishment response - which IMHO is the more sane action for the larger pertcentage of cases - taking into account that to actually have anywhere to enforce our "law" upon then we will of required to of made significant progress with various initatives that combined will pretty much erradicate most defacto causes of "cirme". There's been a few like yourselves in support of a death penalty, I personally am not against this - given the "right" circumstances - but the overall trend I've noticed seems to be somewhat against(https://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/criminal-justice-25/topic/should-the-death-penalty-be-allowed-in-as-garciahttps://asgardia.space/en/forum/forum/criminal-justice-25/topic/punish-corruption-with-death-by-law-1151<>). The "two-track system" is what I would envision being eventually implimented, or somehing like, given the variables currently displayed.

Ari 18, 01 / Mar 15, 17 16:37 UTC

Every attempt should be made to rehabilitate any criminal offenders, even if it is estimated as unlikely to work. Because there could be factors at play that leave that individual no choice. Factors like the safety of a loved one being threatened by some person/people for example and it would be hypocritical to punish someone with incarceration because they acted to protect their family. When every last one of us would all do the same. I also believe it would be unethical to lock someone up indefinitely. By locking someone up indefinitely, you would basically have reduced that person to the status of an animal in a zoo! Which is quite a disgusting, unethical, and immoral thing for a person to do or suggest. It also goes against the ideals of Asgardia. On top of that, you would actually be making the problem worse.

Locking a person up indefinitely would nurture the hate inside them, give them a target for that hate, a purpose, reduce the person/people to the status of an animal in a zoo basically, and subject them to an environment where being aggressive and willing to harm folks becomes beneficial qualities. The only way I see such an idea being successful and not having the negative effects it normally would is, to design the prison of rehabilitation facility like an apartment building. Where the patients/inmates would have their own little private space and the luxuries that come with it like television for example if that ends up being a thing in Asgardia. This way the inmate will not have the necessity to adopt the behavior of an animal to survive and the hope of rehabilitating them remains and could possibly grow as they come to understand their actions, maybe even regret them, decide that they want to change, or both!

  Updated  on Ari 18, 01 / Mar 15, 17 16:45 UTC, Total number of edits: 3 times