Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="John Morrow" data-source="post: 2171517" data-attributes="member: 27012">Actually, yes, we probably are.&nbsp; Especially when time is of the essence.&nbsp; In many ways, the American justice system has become more and more LN.&nbsp; Usually it still works pretty well because it was designed with good intentions, but it can break down and be used to prevent justice and protect the guilty. Do a Google search on the names &quot;Brenda Schaefer&quot; and &quot;Mel Ignatow&quot; if you want to see how bad it can get.&nbsp; Personally, in cases like that, I think a little old fasioned &quot;lex talionis&quot; from the family is warranted (with a pardon to let them off the hook), since the justice system offers them no justice.&nbsp; Yes, the rule is well intentioned and often works as intended, but applying any rule without consideration for the context and the results is putting the rules above the context or the results. And that's exactly why the UK and Australia seem to be looking into changing their double jeopardy rules, if they haven't already.Applying the rules without consideration for justice or good is exactly what a LN person would do and that's exactly why I claim that the corner alignments like LG are unstable.&nbsp; Given a choice between applying a rule (e.g., &quot;never torture&quot;) or a good outcome (e.g., saving a girl who will die if she isn't found), you have to make a choice about which one is more important -- the rule or the innocent life.&nbsp; And if a character reliably picks the rule over the innocent life, are they really LG or LN?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="John Morrow, post: 2171517, member: 27012"] Actually, yes, we probably are. Especially when time is of the essence. In many ways, the American justice system has become more and more LN. Usually it still works pretty well because it was designed with good intentions, but it can break down and be used to prevent justice and protect the guilty. Do a Google search on the names "Brenda Schaefer" and "Mel Ignatow" if you want to see how bad it can get. Personally, in cases like that, I think a little old fasioned "lex talionis" from the family is warranted (with a pardon to let them off the hook), since the justice system offers them no justice. Yes, the rule is well intentioned and often works as intended, but applying any rule without consideration for the context and the results is putting the rules above the context or the results. And that's exactly why the UK and Australia seem to be looking into changing their double jeopardy rules, if they haven't already. Applying the rules without consideration for justice or good is exactly what a LN person would do and that's exactly why I claim that the corner alignments like LG are unstable. Given a choice between applying a rule (e.g., "never torture") or a good outcome (e.g., saving a girl who will die if she isn't found), you have to make a choice about which one is more important -- the rule or the innocent life. And if a character reliably picks the rule over the innocent life, are they really LG or LN? [/QUOTE]

Verification