Author Topic: EP393: Red Card  (Read 34807 times)

Windup

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
Reply #25 on: April 29, 2013, 12:58:29 AM

And one other question: In this world, how does any politician make it through his or her first year in office?


Natural selection, I suppose. The only politicians left would be the ones that aren’t what comes to mind when we think of politicians.


Well, politicians are just a special case of a whole group of people who perform functions that are necessary, but that really, really aggravate someone, even when they are done in a just, conscientious and throughly professional manner.  Think about judges, police, prosecutors, building inspectors, people who remove children from abusive homes, etc.  

And I think it's too easy to bash politicians.  Virtually every figure we now consider a "great leader" faced ferocious opposition during their lifetimes -- do I even need to mention Lincoln?  And I suspect that in the late 1700's, there were many Tory sympathizers who would have happily pulled the trigger on Washington.

I agree, I'd love to see a sequel that dealt with that aspect.

"My whole job is in the space between 'should be' and 'is.' It's a big space."


lisavilisa

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
Reply #26 on: April 29, 2013, 03:22:39 AM
And one other question: In this world, how does any politician make it through his or her first year in office?

Natural selection, I suppose. The only politicians left would be the ones that aren’t what comes to mind when we think of politicians.
Here's my question: let's say you have a red card and you go to assassinate someone--legally. Only I'm that person's bodyguard and when I see you with a gun, I shoot you before you get to show your red card. Am I guilty of murder because you were engaged in a legal action, even though I didn't know it was a legal action?

Maybe they have a "Yellow Card"?



Windup

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
Reply #27 on: April 29, 2013, 03:34:43 AM

Would bodyguards even exist in a world where it’s legal—and encouraged—to kill people?


I would think you'd still have bodyguards to protect you from crazy people, hired assassins, etc.  Presumably most murders in the story world are dealt with the same way they are in our world.

Remember it's not just anyone who is allowed to kill people; it's only a limited group -- the red-card holders.  That keeps the violence down to a manageable level.  (We assume...)

"My whole job is in the space between 'should be' and 'is.' It's a big space."


Max e^{i pi}

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1038
  • Have towel, will travel.
Reply #28 on: April 29, 2013, 05:40:29 AM
And one other question: In this world, how does any politician make it through his or her first year in office?

Natural selection, I suppose. The only politicians left would be the ones that aren’t what comes to mind when we think of politicians.
Here's my question: let's say you have a red card and you go to assassinate someone--legally. Only I'm that person's bodyguard and when I see you with a gun, I shoot you before you get to show your red card. Am I guilty of murder because you were engaged in a legal action, even though I didn't know it was a legal action?

Maybe they have a "Yellow Card"?
Suddenly everyone's a soccer (football) fan...

Cogito ergo surf - I think therefore I network

Registered Linux user #481826 Get Counted!



lyda

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Reply #29 on: April 29, 2013, 07:50:16 AM
Here's my question: let's say you have a red card and you go to assassinate someone--legally. Only I'm that person's bodyguard and when I see you with a gun, I shoot you before you get to show your red card. Am I guilty of murder because you were engaged in a legal action, even though I didn't know it was a legal action?

Why would you need a bodyguard in this world? Isn't the point of shooting people dead for random infractions that people will all be nicer to each other? That there will be less crime.

But your question does highlight the problem of giving individuals the power of judge, jury and executioner. It's very difficult to make the correct judgement in the heat of the moment. Recent events clearly show that getting valid info in a rapidly developing situation isn't easy and is highly error-prone.

If you walk into a shop and see a man with a gun and a man shot on the ground, what should you do if you have a gun yourself?



TheArchivist

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Reply #30 on: April 29, 2013, 08:17:14 AM
I wish I liked this more but actually the skilfull writing was its own enemy. Glum, dreary Linda being glum and dreary and resorting to murder because she was too glumly dreary to shake the pair of them into a more positive life.

Unfortunately that was pretty much my reaction too. Yes, it's an interesting premise (though not really SF - and no, Alistair, it's not horror either to my mind) and it's triggered some interesting discussion, but the execution of the story itself, and the reading, left me nonplussed. One sentence of action at the start, two sentences of (rather predictable) twist at the end, and a whole load of dreary in between.



olivaw

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
Reply #31 on: April 29, 2013, 10:48:27 AM
The bulk of the story is spent on explaining the premise, while also exploring some consequences of the premise, all mixed together. And that's a pretty tough trick to pull off, but I thought it was done well here.

The number of ways this bizarre law could go wrong is colossal, so I think the particular set of problems the author dealt with was both funny and touching.



Alasdair5000

  • Editor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1022
    • My blog
Reply #32 on: April 29, 2013, 01:45:38 PM
I wish I liked this more but actually the skilfull writing was its own enemy. Glum, dreary Linda being glum and dreary and resorting to murder because she was too glumly dreary to shake the pair of them into a more positive life.

Unfortunately that was pretty much my reaction too. Yes, it's an interesting premise (though not really SF - and no, Alistair, it's not horror either to my mind) and it's triggered some interesting discussion, but the execution of the story itself, and the reading, left me nonplussed. One sentence of action at the start, two sentences of (rather predictable) twist at the end, and a whole load of dreary in between.

Fair enough. By the way it's spelt Alasdair.



benjaminjb

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1389
Reply #33 on: April 29, 2013, 02:20:30 PM
Here's my question: let's say you have a red card and you go to assassinate someone--legally. Only I'm that person's bodyguard and when I see you with a gun, I shoot you before you get to show your red card. Am I guilty of murder because you were engaged in a legal action, even though I didn't know it was a legal action?

Why would you need a bodyguard in this world? Isn't the point of shooting people dead for random infractions that people will all be nicer to each other? That there will be less crime.

But your question does highlight the problem of giving individuals the power of judge, jury and executioner. It's very difficult to make the correct judgement in the heat of the moment. Recent events clearly show that getting valid info in a rapidly developing situation isn't easy and is highly error-prone.

If you walk into a shop and see a man with a gun and a man shot on the ground, what should you do if you have a gun yourself?
Now what if you walk into a shop, see a guy with a gun, someone dead on the ground, and you have a gun AND a red card--would you use your Red Card to kill some random person? Or would you want to hold onto it for something more meaningful?



TheArchivist

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Reply #34 on: April 29, 2013, 02:40:46 PM
By the way it's spelt Alasdair.

Ooops! Sorry. I know too many of your namesakes who spell it differently. :-[



InfiniteMonkey

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
  • Clearly, I need more typewriters....
Reply #35 on: April 30, 2013, 12:26:02 AM
I thought this was a very sad story, though perhaps not for the reasons one might think.

The saddest part for me was her mentioning "dresses she'd only worn once" which just put in mind of the sad detritus of a life half-lived. This sort of detritus might be sad in anybody's life, but here it's of a woman who seems not to have had any fun in her life, and that also seems to be mostly because of her no-good husband. Now, I wouldn't advocate the shooting of a spouse unless your life was really in danger, but Linda is MUCH better off without him. And I think the world might be too.

Sara, OTOH, is simply vile. I feel even less remorse in her imminent red-carding.



InfiniteMonkey

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
  • Clearly, I need more typewriters....
Reply #36 on: April 30, 2013, 12:31:12 AM

And one other question: In this world, how does any politician make it through his or her first year in office?


Law of averages, perhaps. There are more politicians than red cards in circulation.

Maybe they have better security.

Though I suspect they would be even more spineless and craven than they are now.



InfiniteMonkey

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
  • Clearly, I need more typewriters....
Reply #37 on: April 30, 2013, 12:39:49 AM
Why would you need a bodyguard in this world? Isn't the point of shooting people dead for random infractions that people will all be nicer to each other? That there will be less crime.

<snip>
If you walk into a shop and see a man with a gun and a man shot on the ground, what should you do if you have a gun yourself?

Well, our world has plenty of people with bodyguards that are not under imminent threat of death. Besides, we aren't told you can't prevent a red card from being acted on. Even if there was a penalty, I'm sure there would some people rich enough to hire people for the right price and take care of any penalties.

And remember, the gun in question came from the Government with the Red Card. I would suspect that all pre-existing gun laws (easy, Monkey, don't rise to the easy bait!) would still be in effect.



benjaminjb

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1389
Reply #38 on: April 30, 2013, 12:41:59 AM
Can someone provide some evidence or insight as to why she married her husband or why she stayed with him? I got the impression (from the make-up discussion) that she wasn't a great looker; and possibly has no career or job skills. But right now I can't remember what the story actually says on this matter. Do you?



TheArchivist

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Reply #39 on: April 30, 2013, 09:02:41 AM
Can someone provide some evidence or insight as to why she married her husband or why she stayed with him? I got the impression (from the make-up discussion) that she wasn't a great looker; and possibly has no career or job skills. But right now I can't remember what the story actually says on this matter. Do you?
I don't know that the story said anything on the subject. Is it important? I mean, the simple fact is that an awful lot of people are in marriages an outside observer would be unable to comprehend the origins of. Quite a few are in marriages they, themselves, have difficulty remembering why they got into. Abused partners do stay with the abusive one, for many reasons that seem idiotic under cold, logical scrutiny.
As I recall, the husband sprung a surprise cruise on her for the honeymoon. Without ever having discussed it. Now that's pretty idiotic, but it's not, in itself, abusive or selfish or in any way unpleasant. He probably thought he was being incredibly romantic. As it turned out, Linda reacted badly to the sea, but not being the sort to complain, she tried to handle it gracefully. Larry may even have tried to respond right to that, but within a couple of days it had got too much for him. That's when his true colours began to show - too late for Linda to have avoided the mistake: they were already married.
I can't fault the portrayal of these glum, dreary people.



matweller

  • EA Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 678
Reply #40 on: April 30, 2013, 01:40:08 PM
As I recall, the husband sprung a surprise cruise on her for the honeymoon. Without ever having discussed it. Now that's pretty idiotic, but it's not, in itself, abusive or selfish or in any way unpleasant. He probably thought he was being incredibly romantic. As it turned out, Linda reacted badly to the sea, but not being the sort to complain, she tried to handle it gracefully. Larry may even have tried to respond right to that, but within a couple of days it had got too much for him. That's when his true colours began to show - too late for Linda to have avoided the mistake: they were already married.
I can't fault the portrayal of these glum, dreary people.
Maybe I'm a jerk, but I took the implication of this to be that he "surprised" her with the cruise, but that he wanted to be there because of a mistress he had going as well or because he intended to spend as much time with as many other women as possible -- hence his wife not seeing him the entire time. This led me to think he was abusive from the start and just held his wife as a good doormat. She'd never leave him no matter what, and that left him open to hitting the town with whomever because one night stands can't sue for alimony.



TheArchivist

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Reply #41 on: April 30, 2013, 04:45:38 PM
I took the implication of this to be that he "surprised" her with the cruise, but that he wanted to be there because of a mistress he had going as well
That would certainly be reminiscent of what has been alleged regarding a certain heir to the throne...
he intended to spend as much time with as many other women as possible -- hence his wife not seeing him the entire time.
I didn't get that from the story, and I'm still not sure it's actually implied, though it's not ruled out either. It would mean that the marriage was broken well before it even started, but not that Linda knew that at the time. So I think the gist of my answer to benjaminjb still holds.
Linda is definitely portayed as a doormat - she hears Sara dissing her in the police station and utterly fails to react. Now I know adverts for cleaning products are fascinating, but still...  ;)



Devoted135

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1252
Reply #42 on: April 30, 2013, 07:08:08 PM
Well, this one provided a lot of food for thought! I agree with the general trend in the thread that the story itself was a bit dreary (probably on purpose, though I'm of the opinion that librarians get a bad rap), but the world itself has room for endless speculation. I am left wondering why Linda never left Larry, statistics on abuse victims notwithstanding. At any rate, we wouldn't have had a story if she left him, so there's that.

For the record, I don't think this one qualifies as horror, either.


I didn't get that from the story, and I'm still not sure it's actually implied, though it's not ruled out either. It would mean that the marriage was broken well before it even started, but not that Linda knew that at the time. So I think the gist of my answer to benjaminjb still holds.
Linda is definitely portayed as a doormat - she hears Sara dissing her in the police station and utterly fails to react. Now I know adverts for cleaning products are fascinating, but still...  ;)

In my mind, she did react. She knew she would be needing the cleaning products after using her second red card on Sara.



Andy C

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 21
Reply #43 on: April 30, 2013, 07:31:53 PM
So I enjoyed this story, it had something of a literary feel to it and I liked the slightly sinister and yet mundane feel to it. Well read, great story.
Very heartfelt commments from Alasdair at the end I definitely got "there is no such thing as consequence free violence", definitly got that.

Yes I confess, I did think of this story "is this scifi?" and Alaistair pre-empted this coming up by saying  that issue would come up and saying "could this have been on pseudo-pod"? But then I looked up definitions of sci fi on Wikipedia and found 32 of them, so what can I say? It's scifi.

Anyway, good story, thanks

A




lyda

  • Extern
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Reply #44 on: April 30, 2013, 11:45:01 PM
Sara, OTOH, is simply vile. I feel even less remorse in her imminent red-carding.

Is Sara getting an enforcement? Or is she going to shoot herself? ISTR that being mentioned as how some use their red card.



InfiniteMonkey

  • Lochage
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
  • Clearly, I need more typewriters....
Reply #45 on: May 01, 2013, 12:30:59 AM
Sara, OTOH, is simply vile. I feel even less remorse in her imminent red-carding.

Is Sara getting an enforcement? Or is she going to shoot herself? ISTR that being mentioned as how some use their red card.

Well, we aren't told/she doesn't take the card out until after we heard Sara trashing Linda.

And given out rare criminality of suicide is these days, I doubt it would be for self-use.



TheArchivist

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Reply #46 on: May 01, 2013, 10:10:17 AM
In my mind, she did react. She knew she would be needing the cleaning products after using her second red card on Sara.
Yes, I can see that is a valid interpretation, it just wasn't how it came across to me. Later on she seems to arrive at a... well, I certainly hope it was a decision to "red card" Sara, but I don't seem to be alone in not being sure about it. At the time, though (in the police station), she doesn't react. She may be thinking, plotting, building up to something - although the narrative/reading didn't have that feel at all to my mind - but not reacting. Perhaps she's only acting the doormat while her fury bubbles up - but actually that's fairly characteristic of people who really are doormats. Usually when they finally burst they aren't in possession of a red card, though.



lisavilisa

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
Reply #47 on: May 01, 2013, 04:20:51 PM
Did the story ever imply that she was an abused wife?

The husband sounds like a mean bastard who ignored and belittled her. He cheated on her. But did he ever hurt or endanger her, make her feel scared?



JDoug

  • Palmer
  • **
  • Posts: 45
Reply #48 on: May 02, 2013, 05:50:13 PM
*Overthinking it*

As soon as I heard the miracle clean advert, I was certain, certain that Linda was going to shoot Sara. What I wasn't expecting was the second red card. See, I thought this was going to be the story of how your first murder is awful, awful hard and the second one is just soooo easy. And to a certain extent it was - Linda didn't spend four years warning Sara. Or maybe she did. Maybe she was aware that Sara knew she had a card. Perhaps she knew that Sara was her woman her husband was cheating on her with. And maybe she just decided to clean the trash out it one day. I'm not really certain.

But as I said, I wasn't expecting the second red card. It made things surprisingly tidy. One of the things that I thought about during this story is what it would be like to carry around the power to kill anyone, anyone who just pushed it that bit to far for you. With minimum (because as Alisdair says, it's never none) consequences. Then in one day, to lose it. To lost that solution that seemed oh so simple. I'm not sure you'd ever really get over having been a red card holder. Or maybe the best thing to do is to use it as quickly as possible on the first speeder that pisses you off.

This story caused me to think alot. I talked it over with a friend of mine, who doesn't normally listen to the podcast. We both agreed we'd like to hear more stories set in the same world.



CryptoMe

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1146
Reply #49 on: May 07, 2013, 04:03:17 AM
I really liked this story, for many of the reasons others have already mentioned.

But, I have a detail problem. If Linda has a second red card, why does she need the cleaning product? We are told that the government takes care of the clean up, and when Linda gets home she even remarks upon what a good job they did with the husband's mess. So, if that is the case, why does she need the cleaning products?  If anyone can help with this, it would be greatly appreciated.