"Second Chances" and its disturbing implications

[Timo]

Might well be, as the explanation we get in the episode is something our heroes cooked up on the spot, based on very little available evidence. Perhaps only the next cycle at Nervala IV, eight years later, would allow Starfleet to properly test the theory and discover that it didn't hold water after all?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Lance]

It's also possible that the original Riker's career skyrocketed mostly because Admiral Pressman was bribing him with promotions to ensure his silence. And either he wouldn't go to the same trouble with Tom Riker because the same perks wouldn't have the same effect on a man whose life and career already were completely different - or because he simply didn't have time to do anything about Tom before "The Pegasus" happened.

My take has always been that Riker's meteoric rise in rank was a series of lucky coincidences, as well as Riker being somebody who puts himself 'out there'. The Pegasus incident seen him, as literally a fresh graduate from the academy, take a critical role in protecting his captain when the majority of the ship's crew mutinied. Whatever the moral implications of the incident, and I don't doubt Riker stewed over them for decades afterwards, once they got back to Earth his standing up for Pressman and his keeping Pegasus a secret, he probably found a good word going in for him, hence his first promotion. Then the Nervala IV incident happens and he gets another commendation, resulting in his making Lt. Commander. If you look at the timeline, including the events of "Best of Both Worlds" where he does make Captain, then Riker goes from Ensign to Captain in the space of about nine years. He was probably seen as Starfleet's golden boy. I don't doubt that his decision to stay aboard Enterprise as her XO was seen as something of a surprise by the brass back at Starfleet command.

 

[Unicron]

But apparently it isn't murder if you kill your own clone, as Riker did in Up the Long Ladder, so at least there's a contractual loophole to get out that inconvenient implication.

I'd say it would depend on the context of the killing. The Riker clone was being formed from genetic material which was stolen from Riker, after he denied its use (as was his right to do). His rights were violated in the process, although the theft was done out of desperation.

 

[jpv2000]

I don't doubt that his decision to stay aboard Enterprise as her XO was seen as something of a surprise by the brass back at Starfleet command.

It was a let down for me as well.

I always wanted Riker to be Captain, finally got my wish.

Worf agreed with me as he requested to transfer to Riker's new ship if he took the promotion, as I recall.

Even if it had meant his leaving the series, I knew someone would immediately start writing novels of Riker's adventures, as they now do.

 

[R. Star]

Kinda makes you consider property issues too. I know Will's "gift" of his own trombone to Tom was meant to be a peace offering... but shouldn't he have legal claim to everything else too? Almost insulting to be given one of your own things as a "gift" back to you by a fellow keeping the rest as if he's completely entitled to them all. Like I took your wallet but here's your license back. I don't need it.

 

[T'Girl]

The Riker clone was being formed from genetic material which was stolen from Riker, after he denied its use (as was his right to do). His rights were violated in the process, although the theft was done out of desperation.

All of which is true, but should not Riker have expressed his disagreement with the creation of the clone upon the people who stole his genetic material and created the clone?

And not upon the unconscious and defenseless clone, who was innocent of all wrong doing?

 

[DonIago]

Like I've said, since the clone hadn't achieved consciousness yet I think Riker was allowed to make the choice to abort it.

He should express his displeasure to the people who raped him as well.

 

[DonIago]

Kinda makes you consider property issues too. I know Will's "gift" of his own trombone to Tom was meant to be a peace offering... but shouldn't he have legal claim to everything else too? Almost insulting to be given one of your own things as a "gift" back to you by a fellow keeping the rest as if he's completely entitled to them all. Like I took your wallet but here's your license back. I don't need it.

Now that's a fairly amusing conundrum!