• @TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    -107 months ago

    The entire concept of having idiots from the area decide your fate went out of style with the wild west. The average person has no ghastly idea what the case is even about. These are people that don’t even know the difference between WiFi, “the internet”, and google itself.

    If you really want a jury for a technical discussion it should be a jury of technical people versed in the subject.

    But overall, ban jury duty. Archaic stupid process.

    • @captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      77 months ago

      Juries are vital. Yes we should be able to select for understanding and knowledge, but they’re also there to represent the will of the people from whom the government derives its power.

      If the people are too uneducated to understand things then maybe we need to fund education better.

      • @maryjayjay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        -27 months ago

        They are not vital. Almost no countries in the world practice trial by jury other than The US, the UK, Australia, Canada, and Ireland. The US is the only country in the world that uses trial by jury for civil cases.

        The law is complex and nuanced. Most people lack the understanding and background to apply the law justly and uniformly. It is an antiquated idea that should go.

        • @rando895@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          17 months ago

          Yes, we should let the unbiased and just judicial system remove any potential check on it’s power through the exclusion of a jury. Surely then things will be better. In fact I can’t think of a single situation where allowing a judge and some lawyers to interpret the nuances of law led to anything terrible.

          Nope, it’s the stupid idiots who don’t know anything about… What ever I want to make up right now