Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinRat
It would be a much safer world if computers ran the judicial system jury and sentencing. No human bias.
|
Things would certainly be fairer. Eliminate prejudice against minorities and bias against anybody in jury deliberations. Prevent media hype like MSNBC's campaign against Zimmerman early, and John Edward's charisma in his trial, from having an effect on the verdict.
HOW we could implement a change, I don't know. But I'm convinced jury by only our peers is basically flawed. Because people can be very stupid at times.
Our society is built partly on the idea that majority rule can determine the best course of action overall. But in small groups, it seems like the opposite is true. And as far as individuals go, like George Carlin said: Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are even stupider!
I think judging whether to take a person's freedom away, let alone their life, should be done by people far above average intelligence. I think we'd need an AI a lot "smarter" than say IBM's Watson, to handle a court verdict, but at least we could eliminate some stupidity that way.