Cardassian legal system

[the game]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict. It never matters if the cop was proven to have taken the correct course of action. Should we just automatically decide that they're guilty?

[Deleted]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict.

The exact same justice system has been used (or still is) in every socialist country from DDR to North Korea. Cop haters seem to generally share the same ideology.

[Deleted]

The exact same justice system has been used (or still is) in every socialist country from DDR to North Korea.

In the GDR (english for DDR) they had basically the same rules for justice as like in west germany. The only difference was that the SED party was above the law. As the GDR was a socialist dictatorship.

Cop haters seem to generally share the same ideology.

You call a police state as like the cardassian dictatorship "Cop haters"?

[Gorsameth]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict. It never matters if the cop was proven to have taken the correct course of action. Should we just automatically decide that they're guilty?

Your confusing two things.
Just because something is currently legal (like the barrier for use of deadly force by a US police officer being 'the cop felt threatened') does not mean that people can't disagree with the law and wish that the actions were illegal.

A soldier on patrol in the sands of Iraq has a higher barrier for use of deadly force then a US cop walking a US street. As per actual soldiers who became police officers.

That shows just how fucked up the system is.
Something can be legal and socially wrong at the same time.

[Zethras]

@Elim Garak

How does this legal system work for you, what are the Pros and Cons?

[Deleted]

The verdict might be known, but the perpetrator isn't always.

To keep society functioning, the public needs a sense that the justice system works and stuff like that.

So somebody has to pay for the crimes, but who it is doesn't always matter as much. Sometimes its a scapegoat, sometimes its the real perp, sometimes its whoever is convenient.

perhaps for your cop analogy the klingon system is a better example: where you have are assumed guilty but have a more-or-less-fair chance to prove your innocence, and the crimes often involve honor which is kinda applicable to cops.

[Raone]

Its the same with all stereotypes. There could be thousands of amazing cops who go above and beyond but one bad cop and "SEE ALL COPS ARE BAD!!" will start popping up.

Also our legal system isn't innocent until proven guilty anymore like its suppose to be, it's guilty until proven innocent (which is close to what the OP is meaning)... and even with 100% proof some people will still see you as guilty because you haven't "proven" in whatever ideology they have you are innocent.

[Gorsameth]

Its the same with all stereotypes. There could be thousands of amazing cops who go above and beyond but one bad cop and "SEE ALL COPS ARE BAD!!" will start popping up.

Also our legal system isn't innocent until proven guilty anymore like its suppose to be, it's guilty until proven innocent (which is close to what the OP is meaning)... and even with 100% proof some people will still see you as guilty because you haven't "proven" in whatever ideology they have you are innocent.

The problem is that to many amazing cops end up defending the bad cops because 'we have to stand as one' and all that shit.

Keeping the public trust high should be one of the main points of the police. And that means proper investigations and punishing of bad cops.
Instead its coverup after coverup.

[Spiffums]

Your confusing two things.
Just because something is currently legal (like the barrier for use of deadly force by a US police officer being 'the cop felt threatened') does not mean that people can't disagree with the law and wish that the actions were illegal.

A soldier on patrol in the sands of Iraq has a higher barrier for use of deadly force then a US cop walking a US street. As per actual soldiers who became police officers.

That shows just how fucked up the system is.
Something can be legal and socially wrong at the same time.

The soldier in Iraq has a team supporting him. 9 times out of 10 the US cop is alone with backup a few mins away.

[Yvaelle]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict. It never matters if the cop was proven to have taken the correct course of action. Should we just automatically decide that they're guilty?

Perhaps an unfortunate choice of analogies

Given it always turns out the Cardassians are abusing their power, despite having agreed to a detente with Bajor/Star Fleet/settlers, etc.

[Kellhound]

The soldier in Iraq has a team supporting him. 9 times out of 10 the US cop is alone with backup a few mins away.

And 9 times out of 10 the soldier is facing more people with much heavier weapons.

[Phookah]

The soldier in Iraq has a team supporting him. 9 times out of 10 the US cop is alone with backup a few mins away.

I don't know how the police operate where you live, but where I am you don't even see cop stop a guy on a bike without 2 cars. "Alone" is extremely inaccurate.

[Zmaniac17]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict. It never matters if the cop was proven to have taken the correct course of action. Should we just automatically decide that they're guilty?

It doesn't matter what people want in regards to the verdict. The cop deserves a fair trial just like anyone else. Focusing to heavily on public opinion in these situations isn't very useful. The public general public does not have a say in the trial, rightly so. It is up to the jury and the judge. The general public usually doesn't have all the facts to make an informed decision.

That being said, in many cases the cops have been put above the law and this is a problem. The system must remain as fair as possible. So by no means are public protests unjustified. There must be a constant push for equality or we will lose whatever we have of it. Equality is not an equilibrium state. It must be constantly maintained.

[Spiffums]

I don't know how the police operate where you live, but where I am you don't even see cop stop a guy on a bike without 2 cars. "Alone" is extremely inaccurate.

Sure because all the world is like where you live.

- - - Updated - - -

And 9 times out of 10 the soldier is facing more people with much heavier weapons.

9 times out of 10 the solider isn't taken by surprise if the bad guy pulls out an AK or a rocket launcher.

[Dug]

9 times out of 10 the solider isn't taken by surprise if the bad guy pulls out an AK or a rocket launcher.

...are you serious right now? Do you think ISIS gives them a memo when they're going to attack?

[Wyrt]

Oh, you mean like how every time there's a police involved incident people always blame the civilian?

[Mihalik]

In the Cardassian legal system the verdict is always known before the trial begins and it's always guilty. Is this what people want when a cop is on trial for having to use deadly force? The only verdict some people seem to be willing to accept is a guilty verdict. It never matters if the cop was proven to have taken the correct course of action. Should we just automatically decide that they're guilty?

You know there are these things called "observable patterns" combined with "statistically proven biases".

US cops have endlessly demonstrated a combination of TERRIBLE training with profound incompetence. These two things have a tendency to feed into each other. Cops are trained to use MAXIMUM force and that EVERYTHING is a threat. This alone is a problem. Add to that things like racial and socio economic biases and you have a recipe for disaster.

Social biases also work the other way around, while some think the police are just all around useless and racist and violent, some literally think police can do no harm 'cause their "job is hard".

There is one more factor. But this gets the Second Ammendment folks panties in a bunch.

Due to laxity of gun control in the US, policing actually carries a significant chance to run into armed individuals or gun crime and a lot of the aggressive stupid training is meant to deal with that possibility.

Had the US had fewer guns cops wouldn't need to shit themselves and overreact like fuck every time someone reaches into a pocket.

[Kellhound]

Sure because all the world is like where you live.

- - - Updated - - -



9 times out of 10 the solider isn't taken by surprise if the bad guy pulls out an AK or a rocket launcher.

Yeah right, ambushes are sooooo rare.......

[TheDestinatus]

I watched a seven part documentary on how the US police force is trained, its little wonder they have so many issues. I'm genuinely surprised you don't have more police related incidents.

Police Academy Documentary

[Kellhound]

You know there are these things called "observable patterns" combined with "statistically proven biases".

US cops have endlessly demonstrated a combination of TERRIBLE training with profound incompetence. These two things have a tendency to feed into each other. Cops are trained to use MAXIMUM force and that EVERYTHING is a threat. This alone is a problem. Add to that things like racial and socio economic biases and you have a recipe for disaster.

Social biases also work the other way around, while some think the police are just all around useless and racist and violent, some literally think police can do no harm 'cause their "job is hard".

There is one more factor. But this gets the Second Ammendment folks panties in a bunch.

Due to laxity of gun control in the US, policing actually carries a significant chance to run into armed individuals or gun crime and a lot of the aggressive stupid training is meant to deal with that possibility.

Had the US had fewer guns cops wouldn't need to shit themselves and overreact like fuck every time someone reaches into a pocket.

The US had significant gun ownership long before the police decided to act and gear up like they were at war.

In 2015, 41 police where killed, vs 986 people who where killed by the police. 45 police where killed by accidents that year, so even in the US police are more likely to die accidentally than intentionally.