Stuff that make you wonder but not own thread worthy

[Mojochi]

I take a little umbrage with Picard telling Kevin Uxbridge "We have no laws to fit your crime". It's a sleek line of dialogue, but really? It's genocide. I'm pretty sure you're familiar with genocide, & throughout history there's been some definitive judgements about it.

I suspect he was just being dismissive, after the real issue he'd already stated. "We're not qualified to be your judge". Now THAT part is true. More to the point, they aren't fit or in a position to judge nor sentence him, so what would be the point?

So it's not so much "we have no laws" for that crime. It's "We have no laws" for YOU, ya freak

Or am I supposed to believe if they had a Hitler guy pop up, they've become so enlightened they don't have laws about it? Nah. Check your tongue Picard.

 

[Farscape One]

I think the reality is more like, "We have laws that fit your crime, but you are simply way too powerful for us to be able to enforce any punishment you are given."

And that would be accurate. Picard and the crew were lucky Kevin was a pretty gentle being.

 

[JesterFace]

About Kevin Uxbridge and what he did.
After not figuring out how to punish him, didn't Picard say "you're free to go".
What?
How were they going to stop him?

 

[Mojochi]

About Kevin Uxbridge and what he did.
After not figuring out how to punish him, didn't Picard say "you're free to go".
What?
How were they going to stop him?

Again. I think Picard is being a bit sardonic, just like him saying "We have no laws". He can't be being literal. "You're free to go" translates to "We'll stop pestering you now".

 

[fireproof78]

I take a little umbrage with Picard telling Kevin Uxbridge "We have no laws to fit your crime". It's a sleek line of dialogue, but really? It's genocide. I'm pretty sure you're familiar with genocide, & throughout history there's been some definitive judgements about it.

I suspect he was just being dismissive, after the real issue he'd already stated. "We're not qualified to be your judge". Now THAT part is true. More to the point, they aren't fit or in a position to judge nor sentence him, so what would be the point?

So it's not so much "we have no laws" for that crime. It's "We have no laws" for YOU, ya freak

Or am I supposed to believe if they had a Hitler guy pop up, they've become so enlightened they don't have laws about it? Nah. Check your tongue Picard.

Go find someone who is, Picard.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I take a little umbrage with Picard telling Kevin Uxbridge "We have no laws to fit your crime". It's a sleek line of dialogue, but really? It's genocide. I'm pretty sure you're familiar with genocide, & throughout history there's been some definitive judgements about it.

I suspect he was just being dismissive, after the real issue he'd already stated. "We're not qualified to be your judge". Now THAT part is true. More to the point, they aren't fit or in a position to judge nor sentence him, so what would be the point?

So it's not so much "we have no laws" for that crime. It's "We have no laws" for YOU, ya freak

Or am I supposed to believe if they had a Hitler guy pop up, they've become so enlightened they don't have laws about it? Nah. Check your tongue Picard.

I would very much doubt that the Federation has any laws to fit the specific crime of species-wide mass extermination resulting from a split-second emotional outburst and loss of control. At no time in Federation history have we witnessed the existence of any Federation citizens who possess that level of power and require that level of self-control to avoid that level of instantaneous destruction.

Historically, committing genocide requires a succession of coordinated and deliberate acts by multiple cooperating participants over a protracted period of time. Guilt is measured not just in terms of the level of destruction but also in terms of the level of premeditated intent that the perpetrators have. Hitlers and their followers fall into that category, and no doubt there are plenty of laws to handle those types, and the Kodoses.

In the case of Kevin Uxbridge, there was no premeditation. On the contrary, his intent to avoid doing damage was clear. What Uxbridge did was comparable to what we consider genocide in the way that premediated manslaughter is comparable to first-degree murder. Kevin was provoked by the Husnock in a way that would disturb any reasonable person. The idea that the Federation has any laws to handle that type of distinction would be pretty far-fetched. By what Picard has said, it had literally never come up before to be considered by Federation courts.

 

[Farscape One]

I would very much doubt that the Federation has any laws to fit the specific crime of species-wide mass extermination resulting from a split-second emotional outburst and loss of control. At no time in Federation history have we witnessed the existence of any Federation citizens who possess that level of power and require that level of self-control to avoid that level of instantaneous destruction.

Historically, committing genocide requires a succession of coordinated and deliberate acts by multiple cooperating participants over a protracted period of time. Guilt is measured not just in terms of the level of destruction but also in terms of the level of premeditated intent that the perpetrators have. Hitlers and their followers fall into that category, and no doubt there are plenty of laws to handle those types, and the Kodoses.

In the case of Kevin Uxbridge, there was no premeditation. On the contrary, his intent to avoid doing damage was clear. What Uxbridge did was comparable to what we consider genocide in the way that premediated manslaughter is comparable to first-degree murder. Kevin was provoked by the Husnock in a way that would disturb any reasonable person. The idea that the Federation has any laws to handle that type of distinction would be pretty far-fetched. By what Picard has said, it had literally never come up before to be considered by Federation courts.

Charlie Evans in "CHARLIE X" had those kind of powers and proved he couldn't control his impulses enough that it wouldn't affect other people.

He blew up the Antares from a great distance, after all.

(To be fair, he was given those powers by the Thasians, but the situation is comparable.)

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Charlie Evans in "CHARLIE X" had those kind of powers and proved he couldn't control his impulses enough that it wouldn't affect other people.

He blew up the Antares from a great distance, after all.

(To be fair, he was given those powers by the Thasians, but the situation is comparable.)

There were distinct differences. The Thasians were able to bring back objects that Charlie made go away. They could not bring back the crew of the Antares, because the ship was destroyed when Charlie made its baffle plate go away. Kirk at least theorized that Charlie's powers were taxed to their limits when he took over the Enterprise.

Moreover and crucially, the Thasian admitted that people could have the power to destroy Charlie before he would destroy all of humanity. Since there would have been time to stop him, Charlie was not the same type of immediate and instantaneous threat that Kevin was, or say Q.

Another example was Gary Mitchell. Kirk realized that he had to destroy Gary before he got powerful enough. Gary didn't have time to mature into the type of threat that Kevin posed, though it's conceivable that he would have, had he gone unchecked.

Additionally, in both cases of Charlie and Gary, the Federation never had to cope with their presence in the civilian population where they would have been in the jurisdictions of courts of law. Given what Picard said about such laws not existing, the only laws that we can expect to have existed in the Federation pertaining to such beings were those that gave Starfleet captains like Kirk the authority to deal with such situations as they arose. Specific laws covering hypothetical crimes were unnecessary, because Kirk eliminated the threats before they even got that far.

 

[at Quark's]

I take a little umbrage with Picard telling Kevin Uxbridge "We have no laws to fit your crime". It's a sleek line of dialogue, but really? It's genocide. I'm pretty sure you're familiar with genocide, & throughout history there's been some definitive judgements about it.

It might depend upon how you define the crime. Is the crime the result (i.e. the extermination of the species) or the deeds that lead to it (and the intentions behind them)?

In the latter case, the crime of exterminating a species by a single angry thought, possibly even an uncontrollable one, is very different from the crime of setting up an extensive and premeditation 'extermination program', such as for example the Nazis did.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Genocidal manslaughter? Mental negligence causing death x billions of counts? It has never before been an issue on that scale. And how to punish such a one who cannot have their rights to freedom and power curtailed by a prison sentence?

I suppose the sheer shock of having done it in the first place, then being just powerful enough to do the impossible, but not powerful enough to reverse your actions, and living with that regret....that's about all there is left. There are no members of the species to hold him to account, no survivors to give victims' impact statements or push for sentencing, even if one could sufficiently punish him for it with legal penalties.

 

[JesterFace]

Do you think there's a O'Brien connection between 'Boody Trap' and 'All Good Things...' ?

You know the conversation in' All Good Things...' where Picard (of the past) mentions O'Brien building models starships when he was young. Picard tells O'Brien he got that information from O'Brien's Starfleet record but might that have something to do with the scene from 'Booby Trap' where Miles tells Picard he build ships as a child?

 

[Laughing Dragon]

^

I'm sure you meant 'Booby Trap' in the first line?
Made me think of KC and the Sunshine Band.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Watching Heart of Glory. The scene where Geordi sees Data different than regular humans.

My question is, why couldn't he tell Data's mom was an android?

 

[NCC-73515]

LAFORGE: Basically she's a Soong-type android, except everything about her is designed to fool you into thinking she's human.
CRUSHER: She's got tear ducts, sweat glands, even veins and capillaries underneath her skin.
RIKER: Why does the scanner read her as a human?
CRUSHER: Because she has a feedback processor designed to send out a false bio-signal.
LAFORGE: It's part of her aging programme. Not only does she age in appearance like Data, her vital signs change too.

 

[Mojochi]

Do you think there's a O'Brien connection between 'Boody Trap' and 'All Good Things...' ?

You know the conversation in' All Good Things...' where Picard (of the past) mentions O'Brien building models starships when he was young. Picard tells O'Brien he got that information from O'Brien's Starfleet record but might that have something to do with the scene from 'Booby Trap' where Miles tells Picard he build ships as a child?

I've always thought that was a deliberate direct call back to that very exchange myself. They needed some aspect of personal details for Picard to say, so he seemed wise in the ways of dealing with a crew that didn't yet know him.

Later TNG still had an episodic format to adhere to, but they actually got really good at innocuous little line drops, that referred back to earlier stuff like that. They're all over the place

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I've always thought that was a deliberate direct call back to that very exchange myself. They needed some aspect of personal details for Picard to say, so he seemed wise in the ways of dealing with a crew that didn't yet know him.

Later TNG still had an episodic format to adhere to, but they actually got really good at innocuous little line drops, that referred back to earlier stuff like that. They're all over the place

But Booby Trap happens way after Farpoint so how did Picard get the information?

 

[Mojochi]

But Booby Trap happens way after Farpoint so how did Picard get the information?

In All Good Things, it's Picard traveling back to his Farpoint self. He has 7 years of history with them all. He has retained all the knowledge of them that he's gained.

Interestingly, though he's initially a bit confused, the elderly Picard knows he was brought forward into his future self as well... But also retains all the subsequent years knowledge of those aging years as well, like Geordi's kid's names.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

In All Good Things, it's Picard traveling back to his Farpoint self. He has 7 years of history with them all. He has retained all the knowledge of them that he's gained.

Interestingly, though he's initially a bit confused, the elderly Picard knows he was brought forward into his future self as well... But also retains all the subsequent years knowledge of those aging years as well, like Geordi's kid's names.

Ok

 

[at Quark's]

LAFORGE: It's part of her aging programme. Not only does she age in appearance like Data, her vital signs change too.

Wait a minute. Data is supposed to age (in appearance), I mean, as a process he couldn't really influence himself -unless he'd decide to hack into his own programming perhaps? I could understand that in terms of real-world excuses for him aging on screen and his quest to become more human, etc.

But I always thought his looking 'older' in the future (for example in AGT) was the result of him deciding to change his appearance.

Then what would he have been supposed to look like by, say, the 27th century ? As far as I know, he didn't have a preprogrammed life span, after all.

 

[Mojochi]

Wait a minute. Data is supposed to age (in appearance), I mean, as a process he couldn't really influence himself -unless he'd decide to hack into his own programming perhaps? I could understand that in terms of real-world excuses for him aging on screen and his quest to become more human, etc.

But I always thought his looking 'older' in the future (for example in AGT) was the result of him deciding to change his appearance.

Then what would he have been supposed to look like by, say, the 27th century ? As far as I know, he didn't have a preprogrammed life span, after all.

I think it's both. He has an aging program, that changes him, without the need to act on it himself, which explains why him & Lore are aging the same, by the time of Descent. It's preprogrammed in, but he can also deliberately alter his appearance, like the All Good Things skunk stripe or the beard from The Schizoid Man, or even maybe his Romulan features in Unification. The Klingon suggests it's all paint or something, but maybe not. It's never really said how they alter him.

All this forces you to realize that in general Data is actively choosing his normal skin, hair & eye color the whole time, which he could've updated at any time. Honestly, there really was nothing stopping them from casting an entirely different looking new actor, for any specific purpose. That could've made for an interesting episode. Lore shows up, but he doesn't look like Lore anymore, or Data changes his whole look for a mission or something