Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:
Uh --- no. No one would agree with what PreCrime does once they have a look at their methods, which include unusual treatment of disabled children and cruel and unusual punishment of people who haven't actually done anything wrong.
PreCrime successfully eradicated homicide. While there might be changes to how the post-arrest phase was handled, it would never in a million years be done away with. No politician would ever make that call; it'd be the Guantanamo Bay controversy, where nobody wants to take responsibility for closing it or bringing the inmates to American soil for trial on the off-chance that something bad happens, times one million. Here, it's guaranteed that something bad will happen, and lots of people will start dying again. If by some miracle it was closed down, the first child killed would kick off a "bring back PreCrime" campaign that would quickly reinstate it as the bodies piled up.
It would also be worth noting that we do, in fact, punish crimes of intent today, which is how PreCrime seems to work (hence, for instance, why premeditated murder is detectable so far in advance, whereas they have to race to stop crimes of passion). The precogs are just a far more elaborate tool for assessing intent than we will ever possess. The guy they stop in the opening sequence, for instance, would be on the hook for attempted murder under our current laws (though it would be worth inquiring, in a lot of those cases, whether there's any likelihood of reoffending, since that guy clearly snapped in a moment of extreme surprise, and probably wouldn't repeat the action after being stopped).