Serial Story

I just re-read the beginning of the story on this website. Something caught my eye that I wish someone would explain to me.<BR><BR>Bryant explains to Deckard that Terrence is wanted for the illegal retirement of replicants, and the Deckard goes on to ask why the Homicide Department isn't handling the case.<BR><BR>I thought that replicants weren't accorded any rights. Why are the police involved?

reps don't have any rights, why would it be illegal for anybody retiring them? Given they're presumably dangerous to population, that would be something like civilian self-defense...<BR>_________________<BR><!-- BBCode Start --><B>-Revel in your Time-</B><!-- BBCode End --><BR><BR><font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Centauro on 2002-01-25 22:39 ]</font>

Well, since replicants (at least sixes) are so difficult to distinguish from humans it would be dangerous to allow "freelance" blade runners. If you were living in the Blade Runner universe, I don't think you would appreciate self-apointed hill billy blade runners with PK-D blasters running around in your city! <IMG SRC="/forum/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif">

I agree with the idea that some amateur going around shooting 'people' because he thinks they are Replicants is pretty dangerous!<BR><BR>Also, Reps are property, so killing them is destruction of someone else's property and is still a crime.
[addsig]

That's it exactly, Random Rep and BR Movie. The government doesn't want just anybody running around killing people they suspect are reps. Deckard and Bryant think the Homicide dept. should handle the case because the perpetrator is human. Each of the three previous killings were treated as a murder, until the victim was indentified as a replicant. The Rep-detects don't think they should deal with it because their primary purpose is finding and retiring Reps. Hope that clears things up a bit.
[addsig]

Yes, I see your point, and agree. Now that I think about it, what I said was about the illegality of the action of killing a replicant, not the illegality of amateur bladerunning. Maybe the key wrong-word was 'civilian'. <BR><BR>This is, like Harry says, if the case is treated like a murder until the corpse is identified as a rep, then after that, the suspect of murder isn`t a suspect of murder, but suspect (or guilty) of something else, like destruction of private property. It raises an interesting question about the status of reps as private property whitin a zone where they're not allowed, and where the action to take by the police itself is not recovering the rep and send it back to owner or Tyrell for fix, but instead the destruction on the "device". How hard could a citizen be imprisoned for eliminating a public treat?<BR><BR>If somebody killed someone, and the dead turned to be a replicant, I think that action could not be considered as illegal, cause you could argue self defense, (they're banned cause they're a treat to human lives), unless they can prove you intentionally tracked down the rep for retiring. What indeed could be illegal is the intentional and continous practice of repdetecting by civilians. It makes me think of this situation on my coutry, where the Army has to fight the guerrilla, and they have to fight some private armies, ...that fight the guerrilla too! Because they're both illegal. <BR><BR>Hmmm, I think i'm could be writing a fanfic on this... a very interesting issue.
[addsig]

A 'self-defence' situation with the replicants would be different, but in the story, Terrence was methodically hunting and retireing the replicants. No 'self-defence' situation involved.<BR>It's illegal for an 'un-licensed' person to retire a replicant, even though the replicant will eventually be retired by someone else. Here's a similar situation . . . A man commits a murder, is arrested, tried, and sentenced to death. It is illegal for me to go and kill him, even though he is sentenced to be killed by the state. Interesting scenario, isn't it?<BR>
[addsig]