3 ms·

At least in Congress and many executive positions, they are neither term-limited nor randomly selected.

by ethbr0 4y ago

giantg2 4y ago
Sure, term limits can be good in many ways, and random selection can reduce the people chosing it for the wrong reasons. But who is going to give up their career to be a citizen watcher for just a few years? Likewise, random selection may not yield a cohort with the correct capacity to properly administer the system. I'd almost think the better solution is to use mini-juries to evaluate warrants so the judges aren't just rubber stamping. At least then the judge has to explain the situation and points of law, and aren't the only one making the decision.
- ethbr0 4y ago
  > But who is going to give up their career to be a citizen watcher for just a few years? A Citizen. Rights and responsibilities, etc. > Likewise, random selection may not yield a cohort with the correct capacity to properly administer the system. Of course. That's the downside of random cohorts. But compared to the alternatives (that we actively gripe about), occasional lack of ability is the lesser of two evils. This would also be lessened if there weren't a way to get out of it. Don't want to serve when your number is called? Feel free to be a citizen of another country.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    "A Citizen. Rights and responsibilities, etc." Haha OK. Why not do that for police and judge positions too? Then you'd eliminate the need for this. "That's the downside of random cohorts. But compared to the alternatives (that we actively gripe about), occasional lack of ability is the lesser of two evils." That's one opinion. "This would also be lessened if there weren't a way to get out of it." In one way I agree. In practice I don't. Forced incompetence is generally going to lead to really poor outcomes. By theway, how are Putin's conscripts doing?
    - ethbr0 4y ago
      > Why not do that for police and judge positions too? Because police and judge positions require specialized skill sets and training, and both have access to the force of government, which would seem to merit a higher minimum bar of professionalism. Oversight's "feature" is that there are fewer negative consequences when it's inappropriately applied. > By theway, how are Putin's conscripts doing? You're arguing Putin's conscripts are an example of when a country's best and brightest aren't allowed to excuse themselves from random selection?
- landemva 4y ago
  > mini-juries to evaluate warrant Typically this is a 'grand jury' in USA.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    That's just for filing charges, getting an arrest, right? This would be for search warrants.

At least in Congress and many executive positions, they are neither term-limited nor randomly selected.

by ethbr0 4y ago

At least in Congress and many executive positions, they are neither term-limited nor randomly selected.

Sure, term limits can be good in many ways, and random selection can reduce the people chosing it for the wrong reasons. But who is going to give up their career to be a citizen watcher for just a few years? Likewise, random selection may not yield a cohort with the correct capacity to properly administer the system. I'd almost think the better solution is to use mini-juries to evaluate warrants so the judges aren't just rubber stamping. At least then the judge has to explain the situation and points of law, and aren't the only one making the decision.

ethbr0 4y ago
> But who is going to give up their career to be a citizen watcher for just a few years? A Citizen. Rights and responsibilities, etc. > Likewise, random selection may not yield a cohort with the correct capacity to properly administer the system. Of course. That's the downside of random cohorts. But compared to the alternatives (that we actively gripe about), occasional lack of ability is the lesser of two evils. This would also be lessened if there weren't a way to get out of it. Don't want to serve when your number is called? Feel free to be a citizen of another country.
- giantg2 4y ago
  "A Citizen. Rights and responsibilities, etc." Haha OK. Why not do that for police and judge positions too? Then you'd eliminate the need for this. "That's the downside of random cohorts. But compared to the alternatives (that we actively gripe about), occasional lack of ability is the lesser of two evils." That's one opinion. "This would also be lessened if there weren't a way to get out of it." In one way I agree. In practice I don't. Forced incompetence is generally going to lead to really poor outcomes. By theway, how are Putin's conscripts doing?
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    > Why not do that for police and judge positions too? Because police and judge positions require specialized skill sets and training, and both have access to the force of government, which would seem to merit a higher minimum bar of professionalism. Oversight's "feature" is that there are fewer negative consequences when it's inappropriately applied. > By theway, how are Putin's conscripts doing? You're arguing Putin's conscripts are an example of when a country's best and brightest aren't allowed to excuse themselves from random selection?
landemva 4y ago
> mini-juries to evaluate warrant Typically this is a 'grand jury' in USA.
- giantg2 4y ago
  That's just for filing charges, getting an arrest, right? This would be for search warrants.