Hypothetical law question

#29
#29
So, Carolla wants to get rid of Fifth Amendment protections? Further, if we are going to posit such incredible brain scanning machines, what happens if we also posit brain control devices (or, technology that counters these scanners)?

I would assume that with nano-technology, one could have such devices without being detected.

I think Carolla was saying it off the cuff with no real thought to the effects it would have to the constitution.

And as for your positing the brain control device, then that would totally negate the technology and we would be right back where we started.

What if the positing was limited to only the incredible brain scan machine? Agreed that it would be self incriminating, but could the added efficiency and accuracy in determining cases make the sacrifice in rights worth it? Not saying it would be worth it, just asking if it would warrant any discussion.
 
#31
#31
What if the positing was limited to only the incredible brain scan machine? Agreed that it would be self incriminating, but could the added efficiency and accuracy in determining cases make the sacrifice in rights worth it? Not saying it would be worth it, just asking if it would warrant any discussion.

On this restriction along with the current stated purpose of the jury (determine the facts, not analyze and assess the law), then I do not see a clear objection.
 
#32
#32
I would imagine this borders on self incrimination.

I'll stick with someone having to prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt vs me having to prove my innocence beyond a reasonable doubt

I am along these lines.

It could certainly be used as a tool but shouldn't be forced. One should still be able to plead the fifth.

Now, having said that, if one is truly innocent, it would in his best interest to clear himself.
 

VN Store



Back
Top