I love how saving the world is a get out of jail free card and suffer zero consequences.
How would you have punished him? He obviously made no major waves in the timeline, so he was careful to the degree possible considering the circumstances.
What is your personal head canon?
- Thread starter AmandaSmith
- Start date
How would you have punished him? He obviously made no major waves in the timeline, so he was careful to the degree possible considering the circumstances.
Logic never holds up for time travel. It is a feature, not a bug.
Professional reprimand, admirative punishment, restrictions. Something.
So you would take someone out of the captain's chair that actually understands the ramifications of their actions where time travel is concerned?
With time travel, what rule did he break? His actions were taken before the Temporal Prime Directive ever existed.
Unauthorized travel in to the past.
Is that a rule? I've never heard of it.
Well, given Kirk had 17 temporal violations there must be a rule in there somewhere.
All we know, is that from the 24th century point of view, he had 17 infractions of what they consider improper time travel. Since Kirk is never charged with anything in his own time, I would have to say that those restrictions aren't yet on the books.
You can't really punish someone for breaking a law that doesn't exist. It would be like wanting to execute Vina for visiting Talos IV before there were laws on the books forbidding it.
"Improper time travel" doesn't change breaking a rule.
LUCSLY: Seventeen separate temporal violations. The biggest file on record.
DULMUR: The man was a menace. What was the date of your arrival?
You're right, you can't charge someone ex post facto. But the way they act these rules were in place in some measure that Kirk could be seen as violating them.
They were just a couple of bureaucrats, running people down is part of their job.
I see no reason to not take them at their word.
I would think that since Kirk didn't have 17 time travel instances that we are aware of, that they may have been peppering the sauce.
I mean, we don't have 5 years worth of mission logs that we're viewing, so it stands to reason there would be some stories we had not seen. And again, I don't see why these characters are to be doubted.
The 24th century shows seemed to have a bias against Kirk. From Picard accusing him of cowboy diplomacy, to the Temporal Directive folks, to Janeway saying Kirk and crew wouldn't make it in 24th century Starfleet.
We don't really know, either way, because they don't go into detail.
Because he knows the rules in the 24th century.
...and their claims against Kirk were BS, as there's never been any on-screen evidence of "violations" anyone would be aware of. Further, the bureaucrats are rather ungrateful, since the two probably hailed from the world Kirk saved. Without his actions, the two whiners would not exist.
There couldn't be, as it seems the rules governing time travel didn't exist yet.
Similar threads
