HOMESPELLSARTICLESVIDEOSFORTUNESGROUPSFORUMSMEMBERSFAQSSIGN IN / JOIN

Serious question for all

LIVE PSYCHIC
Get Adobe Flash player
SHOPPING CART
[ SHOP ]
SpellsOfMagic now has an online store, offering over 9000 wiccan, pagan and occult items. Check it out.
SPONSORED LINKS
CURRENT MOON PHASE
TONIGHT'S MOON
Waxing Crescent Moon
Waxing Crescent
40% Full
MEMBERS ONLINE
Burnedwolf6Hadit220IcastorI_Scarlet_AK.tenjoDrususAmyloveU2Mohini77Pyro2311wisteriasongdragonahSilver1984BerryFoxJaybethel20_Telakeshincrysteria
Forums -> General Info -> Serious question for all

Serious question for all
By:
Post # 1
I have just finished watching Minority Report (starring Tom Cruise, Max von Sydow, Colin Farrell, and Samantha Morton) and I have a question I would like to pose to the precognative psychics here.

Do you think that precognative law enforcement will be a staple in the near future and if so would you have any moral qualms about it?

Thank you

Murderface17
Priest
Black Twilight
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By:
Post # 2
Not for some time, until the general populace accepts it, which will be a while.

I oppose it on moral grounds, however, since a precog can be given a false vision fairly easily by both casters and spirits, making it an unreliable tool.

Also, I tend to work with forces that society in general would be opposed to, making me a target of such precog work.

I will say this though, the US governement and several other governments do make use of precogs and remote viewers; it is "off the books" though.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for
By:
Post # 3
Yes, I would kinda object to it on the grounds of the future is constantly changing. A simple action can affect things ten thousands miles away. Alltho I agree with shadowsalve the us gov is profiting off of people like us. Off the books tho lol
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By:
Post # 4
I'm sorry to interfere as a non-psychic but as a law student I have to point out something.
This is a copy from Wikipedia (I could write this on my own but it's better this way because the text is flawless):

Cesare Lombroso, born Ezechia Marco Lombroso, was a Jewish-Italian criminologist and founder of the Italian School of Positivist Criminology. Lombroso rejected the established Classical School, which held that crime was a characteristic trait of human nature. Instead, using concepts drawn from physiognomy, early eugenics, psychiatry and Social Darwinism, Lombroso's theory of anthropological criminology essentially stated that criminality was inherited, and that someone "born criminal"' could be identified by physical defects, which confirmed a criminal as savage, or atavistic.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By: Moderator / Adept
Post # 5
This whole idea is a scary thought.

Fragile X syndrome and XXY syndrome may have a bit of science to back them up when they can state that people who suffer from them can have social and mental problems along with behavioral issues. Do we really want a world where people are punished for crimes they may commit in the future?

I hope that justice is served however only to those who have actually committed a crime in the past/present not the future. That is like punishing someone for having a thought or for them saying something others do not agree with.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By:
Post # 6
This is actually a very interesting question.If we as a species evolve to ba point where we are able to see somones future with certainty,or at least the certainty that the criminal courts have today.
I can see it as a real possibility.
Morally I agree with Kts ,I hope we dont get to a point of passing judgement ,and convicting people for what we believe they are going to do.
I also like the comment posted by Faust,It to me brings up the debate over Nature or Nurture,but thats a different topic,lol
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for
By:
Post # 7
Well yea kts it may seem immoral but wouldn't the world seem a bit safer if there was one less idiot or siller killer? Idk mean maybe little cindy sue can walk down the street of new york feeling a bit safer. I'm all for not invaiding peoples privicay since I consider mind reading invaiding peoples privicay heck even empathy I consider it invasion of privaciy. However seeing into the future is not invasion of privacy unless its a intimite moment.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for
By:
Post # 8
It was spose to say serial killer not siller killer.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By:
Post # 9
I am in agreement. If we get to the point that we punish people based on what we think they will do we will have past a point where we automatically judge people. And even God dares not presume to judge a man until hes dead. But on another note it would in a way make the world a little safer.

For those who havent seen the movie, Tom Cruise' character discovers a flaw in the system. When one of the three precogs disagrees with what the other two see only the coinciding visions are used to convict while the one that differs is stored inside the precog that predicted it. THis is called a minority report (hence the title of the movie).

So working based off that one has to remember the basic fundamental of chaos theory: A butterfly flapping its wings in New York can start a hurricane in Tokyo.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

Re: Serious question for all
By:
Post # 10
For reaction to take place there must be an action. We would start something catastrophically if we broke the rules of karma.
Login or Signup to reply to this post.

ADVERTISEMENT
Forums

Public
Coven
© 2016 SpellsOfMagic.com
All Rights Reserved
This has been an SoM Entertainment Production
For entertainment purposes only