3 ms·
>"I didn't agree with it then and I don't fully agree with it now, but it can work." I actually do agree with it. Same reason as jury nullification. If enough
by FpUser 4y ago
>"I didn't agree with it then and I don't fully agree with it now, but it can work."
I actually do agree with it. Same reason as jury nullification. If enough people (jury members in this case) believe that the law / particular application is unjust then fuck it. In nullification the government must give in. I do not see why it should be any different in general. The key here should be what constitutes "enough"
- nonethewiser 4y agoThis has a name. Mob rule.
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoNot doing this has a name, too. Slavish obedience. The jury is not supposed to be robots. They're there because there's supposed to be someone with judgment.
- FpUser 4y agoAlternatively we can call it restraining our masters when they run amok. They're the same mob that we are. If the law goes against common sense / justice then the fuck with it. Why should we suffer a consequence of some lunatic with damaged brain.
- Timwi 4y agoThat's just a derogatory term for democracy.