You must log in or # to comment.
This guy wiped out an entire race with a thought and your plan is to do what exactly?
Me personally? I’m going to back away slowly without giving him my name.
It’s like that scene in “The Dark Knight”
Lucius Fox : Let me get this straight, you think that your client, one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in the world, is secretly a vigilante, who spends his nights beating criminals to a pulp with his bare hands, and your plan is to blackmail this person?
[Reese’s face falls and Fox smiles]
Lucius Fox : Good luck.
With a thought, because he was pissed off, and Wesley’s big brain idea is to fuck with him. Picard had the wisdom to shrug and go “whatcha gonna do?”
I’m sure Picard could get a hold of Q and make a deal.
Q would have said,
“Oh the Husnock? Horrible, simply horrible species. Good riddance. Did you ask me here to give Uxbridge a medal or something? Because he certainly doesn’t deserve it! Why I’ve already genocided three species this morning and didn’t even get a thank you.”
Fiesta!
That guy put himself in solitary confinement, forever. What could the feddies do to him that is more fitting?
Play with the thermostat?
Cruel and unusual much?
Pipe in an endless loop of “Baby Shark” and Justin Bieber?
Taylor Swift. I’ve got that “wildest dreams” one stuck in my head. It’s an anxiety thing.
Is it really confinement if you can leave of your own volition?
Also, hang him.
Yes, let’s put a noose around the neck of someone who is essentially a god.
What’s he gonna do about it? Besides, Picard already bosses around a god all the time.
If you really are too scared, we can make Sisko do it.
Sisko would probably have a fit.
I mean, I sort of imagine it to be less the “rule on the books” part, and more the “do we actually have the physical capacity to enforce those rules” end of it. They cant really imprison him (I mean while he’s feeling guilty he might stay willingly, but they cant keep him in if he eventually changes his mind, so itd more be him imprisoning himself). Trying to despite the futility of it would seem somewhat dangerous, because again, if he should ever change his mind, you clearly dont want to seem hostile to something with that kind of power, especially when you dont have it. Saying “Our law is not sufficient for you” could just be interpreted as the most diplomatic way given his mental state to justify leaving and not returning.
To be fair Janeway wasn’t around at the time, so they didn’t have any examples of genocide to go off of.
Didn’t Sisko wipe out a whole planet because fuck you Eddington?
He just made it uninhabitable by humans. Not exactly the same as wiping it out, but since it forced displacement of a whole planet, it was genocide.
I think genocide requires death
It doesn’t, according to the actual definition.
I would love to see the source for that. e.g. Oxford Languages says
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
The dictionary isn’t a legal framework or international organization. The UN has a convention on genocide:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.Item (c) comes the closest to what Sisko did, but he did it in a way that gave them a chance to get out, so it’s not a perfect match. Forcing conditions for removing a group probably wouldn’t qualify under any of these. That said, it can be a factor in Ethnic Cleansing, but the Maquis aren’t really an ethnic group.
Good to know
Phlox, Janeway, Sisko
Damn. Lots of genocide from the good guys.
Why not Phlox?
If the Federation was in the business of putting higher beings on trial, don’t you think the second they learned Q was human they’d slap him in a courtroom so fast it’d make his head spin?
Hold up. Q is human??
Fuck me. That’s big spoilers. When am I gonna find this out?
Later on we find out he was just 2 Q kids in a trenchcoat pretending to be human
I summon thee, @Stamets to do your duty
If these are spoilers you are about 30 years behind.
Q
Two that I can remember: Q got temporarily kicked out of the continuum (reference d above), also when Q got banished in the asteroid and Janeway let him out, he became human, then committed suicide.
Note that Q and Q are not the same person.
Of course. A Q may be a Q, but not all Q are the same Q
I was talking about the first Q, of course.
The case with the second Q was technically a civil suit.
Yeah I’m only a couple seasons into TNG.
Q was turned into a human by other Q. It lasted for an episode
He is in one episode.
Genocide requires intent. Whereas this alien just had a fleeting moment of anger at the time of his wife being murdered.
Can he really be tried for genocide? It’s hard to say, but I’d say not. We all have dark intrusive thoughts, and in this instance it had disastrous consequences.
It’s all moot anyway. If you have no means or intention to enforce a law, does it really exist?
Second degree species slaughter
Ah, a heated gaming moment. We’ve all been there.
That’s why manslaughter is different than murder
Doing something in anger is still intent.
We’re talking thinking something, at a moment of extreme stress and anger, after everybody on the planet he lived on was killed, including his wife.
We aren’t talking someone physically doing something.
You’ve never had any intrusive thought, ever? Can you affirm that you wouldn’t have an angry thought even if everybody on Earth was murdered, including loved ones?
Genocide requires intent.
Is that actually, legally, true?
In other words, does the word identify the cause, or the effect?
Can he really be tried for genocide? It’s hard to say, but I’d say not.
How so? The facts seem self-evident.
It’s all moot anyway. If you have no means or intention to enforce a law, does it really exist?
You can still classify someone though in such a way, in hopes that in some future time you can enforce the law on them, having being previously judged as a criminal.
Yes, genocide is intentional, it’s in the definition.
Genocide does require intent, yes.
The heat-of-passion is something to argue to mitigate culpability. Yes, he killed an entire species, and wasn’t exactly justified, but his emotions and passions were inflamed by the aliens murdering his wife making his actions involuntary.
Yeah but we aren’t talking heat-of-the-moment shoving someone into traffic during a bar fight, we’re talking heat-of-the-moment naughty thought during an aerial bombardment from a hostile force where his wife was killed.
deleted by creator
Shut up, Wesley! We must be circumspect with those who could visit genocide upon US with a thought. Also, don’t bring up how often I challenged Q when he could have done the same or I’ll just tell you to shut up again.
COMPUTER TURN OFF THAT NOISE
Genocide is systematic.
This was instantaneous.
Yea, but genocide is like way to much paperwork
The dude snapped when he’s loved ones were killed, that is considered exculpatory of violent actions in almost all legal systems. The difference is that instead of a knife or a gun he had almost omnipotent powers of destruction.
In an ideal society he would get psychological counseling to deal with the trauma and ensure it doesn’t happen again, but I think it’s obvious he was a bit above Troi’s pay grade.
deleted by creator
