this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2026
1220 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

87586 readers
4635 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Why should law enfocement and prosecuters get to decide which laws to enforce and which not to, but jurrors cant?

Unless the laws on the books were short and perfect, there is always going to be enforcement choices, and it seems to me the jury nulification option is no worse than other selective enforcement. It lets guilty people go free, sure, but it sometimes stops unjust incarceration.

[โ€“] culprit@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago

It's a great mechanism for "peer review" especially in the sense that ethics and legality are often entirely different things.