How would you have improved 'Paradise'?

Discussion in 'Deep Space Nine' started by lurok, Oct 19, 2012.

  1. lurok

    lurok Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Location:
    Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
    I don't condone this...but quote of the day :)
     
  2. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Local laws don't equate to anything approaching morality. In Germany in the 40's it was perfectly legal to drag away Jews, gays and other minorities to concentration camps. If something's morally wrong a passed law isn't going to change that. Besides, I saw no evidence there were any restrictions on Alexis and her rule. It's my way, my kid is the only one with a weapon, you don't like it, get in the box.

    Besides, all of those people were Federation citizens. If I was marooned on an island for ten years that doesn't mean I stop being a citizen of my country. Given they had access to technology the entire time there's a very credible argument Alexis could be brought up on manslaughter charges for every death there. Certainly the ending implied to me that Sisko was going to be pushing that option.

    I'm kinda with Raytas... I'm a gentleman.. but that bitch kinda deserved it. Kinda makes you wish Dax or Kira was there so one of them could've decked her without any ramifications there. :p
     
  3. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    More like murder charges, she acted with premediation to strand the colonists on that planet. Any deaths which occur beause of that premdiated action are murder.
     
  4. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    The colonists were always going to end up "stranded". The plan was to settle on the planet permanently, wasn't it? And murder charges? Even if Alixus hadn't set up the duonetic field to suppress all Treknology, the risks involved in establishing a colony aren't trivial. Surely the Federation expects that colonists will die in the effort to establish settlements. How could the Federation charge Alixus with murder when they send colonists out into the untamed frontier where they can be killed by any number of things, up to and including giant crystals that vaporize entire planetary surfaces?
     
  5. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Pretty much why I said manslaughter and not murder. She may not have been the cause of what killed them, but she very deliberately denied the other colonists the means to save them.
     
  6. CommanderRaytas

    CommanderRaytas Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Intergalactic Planetary Planetary Intergalactic
    Thank you.

    As for the abduction bit, I was actually referring to Sisko & Pals, not the colonists. They were held against their will, which amounts to the same thing....and as for the colonists, they were kept there under false pretenses, lest we forget. The woman was a psychopath.
     
  7. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    But they are the only way to express morality in anything but the most irrelevantly subjective manner. Morality is about commonly approved choices, and laws are the expression of common approval.

    For the people of the paradise planet, right and wrong were clearly defined and set in law. If Sisko had a different idea about right and wrong, the legal system existed to dissuade him from having that idea.

    Why should there be evidence of such a thing? It just goes to show that Alixus held the popular vote, and all her actions were considered to be moral.

    Even though it does appear that Starfleet is the sole law enforcement organization in the Federation (apart from the Secret Police of ST3), I doubt Sisko would be in a position to dictate charges that abstract. Alixus would go down on much more concrete terms anyway.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  8. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Erm no the original plan was for them to settle on a different planet. With access to 24th century technology, subspace radio to call for help f needed etc..

    Alixus hijacked the original plan for her own purposes, set up the duonetic field which inhivated the technology. She could have deactivated it to call for medical help. She ensured that the ship crashed landed on that planet. So there was premeditation invovled. Which ups it from manslaughter to murder. Manslaughter usually implies a lack of premediation, taking a conscious decision to do something which results in deaths could be argued to be murder.
     
  9. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    So conceiving a child is murder? That inevitably leads to the death of the child, after all!

    It's not. Not unless the person doing the conceiving also directly murders the child. If and when the child dies because of circumstances (say, stumbles on a poison plant, or outlives the warranty on the heart), the person doing the conceiving is innocent of murder, or indeed of any wrongdoing.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  10. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    what does this have to do with the premise of the show? :confused:

    Alixus could have disabled the device blocking communications at any time someone became sick, and could have called for help.


    if someone's child was dying, and they pretended that their cellphone was broken and that they couldn't dial 911, I think that would be a crime.
     
  11. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Nowadays? Or in the 24th century?
     
  12. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination


    both, I would assume.
     
  13. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Well doing nothing isn't usually a crime, sure it might not be moral. However if you set up the circumstances as Alixus did in "PAradise" and then do nothing it's a crime.
     
  14. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    But she (and the rest of the colony) didn't do nothing; they used local remedies - herbs and poultices and the like.

    Even if Alixus had relented and turned off the duonetic field, it's not as though there's a 911 service out there. They could issue a distress signal, but there would be no telling when it would be answered. So calling any deaths in the colony "murder" is a stretch. Colonization is a risky endeavor. Alixus made it a bit riskier, is all.
     
  15. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    No it's not. No doubt the colony was transporting things to set up an Infirmary. It is also likely it being a newly established colony it would have been receiving aid from the Federation in starting up. The original colony site might have been realtively close to a starbase or trade routes. As for the lack of an emergency service, there is one is called Starfleet.

    No one is saying establishing a colony isn't risky, As Alixus made it risker than it would have been any deaths resulting from increasing that risk are murder. She sabotaged the colony ship so it went of course, she set up the duonetic field that inhibted the technology. Those are conscience decions she made, which result in deaths. As a conscience decions was made it's murder.

    From wikipedia.

    In English law the mens rea requirement of murder is an intention to commit an act (or omission) and that there is a "high degree of probability" that such act or omission will result in the death or serious injury of another person

    She commited the act of sabotage of the colony ship, setting up the dunonetic field which inhibited technology both of which she knew carried a high degree of probablilty that such acts would lead to the deaths of some of the colonists. As such those deaths are murder.
     
  16. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    I think it depends on the situation. I think that if someone stands by and lets someone else die when they have the ability to help them, and helping them doesn't involve any risk, it is some kind of crime. It's not murder of course, but isn't there like a "depraved indifference" law or something?

    like an adult expert swimmer who watched a little kid drown in four or five feet of water, or something like that.

    Any legal experts here? Am I way off base?


    At any rate, as you write, Alixus deliberately imprisoned them there anyway, so she is responsible for foreseeable deaths from the situation she created.
     
  17. CommanderRaytas

    CommanderRaytas Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Intergalactic Planetary Planetary Intergalactic
    It is a crime where I live. When someone is in need of help and you could easily, but don't, that is a crime, and it's punished pretty severely. I would think that this is valid in the Federation, as well, as refusing to help someone who needs your help is despicable.
     
  18. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    This is a nonsensical law that doesn't work in a vacuum. One has to carefully define the limitations on what sort of death or serious injury will be accepted as criminal, out of the infinitely large pool of ways to die or get injured as the consequence of an arbitrary choice X.

    If you give birth to a child, you are according to this law clearly guilty of murdering her, as you have deliberately and willingly created the circumstances where she will eventually and inevitably die. Unless you are an utter nutcase who really believes that death does not exist, that is.

    Speaking of nutcases, there is no law against observing a nonsensical and deadly diet or taking fake medication for an ailment. People can die in silly ways if they want to. And the point here is, the followers of Alixus wanted to die in silly ways.

    None of them are - they are the inevitable consequence of living.

    We have never ever heard of a Federation law that would require a person to take medication when ill. Or to observe a healthy diet. Or to spend all his life indoors clad in safety padding. The Federation is a-okay with people committing suicide through colonization, and apparently even encourages the practice somewhat.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  19. lurok

    lurok Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Location:
    Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
    Discussion here has raised some interesting thoughts about Federation and medical ethics. Particularly regarding intervention - or non, as case may be. Wasn't that the case with Sisko when he was having those visions, and they had to get Jake-o to consent over his wishes? And Janeway sanctioning Q's suicide? (Yeah, I know he's not a Fed citizen, but...) Come to think of it, quite a few times Captains sanctioned 'death wish' missions :)
     
  20. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    It was stipulated in Sisko's log entry that the planet was fairly close to the wormhole, and therefor DS9, any distress call would have been quickly received.

    :)
     

Share This Page