Minority Report Response: Maya Weiss p.9

Pre-Crime as a sign of a totally protective government

1) A totally "protective" government is one that has all of the power so that they are able to look out for the citizens in their society. They believe they have the people's best interests at hand and go to extreme lengths to implement this protection in peoples lives. This term is shown in Pre-Crime as a whole. When it plans on going national per the governments allowance, they are able to see when murders are going to happen and prevent them, but Pre-Crime also exists in a society that is completely ruled by eye scanners and it seems as though no one has any privacy but society is tailored to each person individually and protects them, but this gives the government a huge amount of power over the people which can be used to "protect" them or work against the people.

2) I do not think that our society should have a totally protective government because no one should have total control or power even if it is going to be used in the people's best interest. Pre-Crime presents a system that supposedly eliminates murder which can be argued is a positive in society but to have this, people give up their minds to the government whether it is willingly or not and that is way to much power for a centralized government to have.

3) Had a totally protective government been in place, many shootings that have happened would not have taken place. The government would have been able to foresee it through Pre-Crime
and protect the victims.

Jack Suvari - Minority Report

 

Minority Report Blog Post

1. Pre-Crime as a sign of a totally protective government

In the case of the movie, I believe that a protective government is a government in which they are actively trying to maintain control over the population and limit the amount of 'harm' they can do to themselves. This is best shown through the Pre-Crime program, the government in this world has set up a system that allows it to maintain control over its residing population by preventing murders before they take place.

2. 

I don't believe that the government should implement a system like this. Although the intentions behind stopping murders are great the pathway and actions that the government takes to get there are not ethical. The advantage of having fewer murders would come at the expense of our most personal means of privacy. 

3.

By the premise of Pre-Crime itself, it would be safe to say that any murder that has been in the news or that has ever happened could have been prevented had we had this system in place. Again, this would have come at the cost of the privacy of every individual on the planet but it would have also left all of those victims alive.

Maya Wallace- Minority Report

Concept: Pre-Crime as a sign of a totally protective government.

A totally protective government is one that has high security to ensure safety, and in this society uses impressive technology to protect society. They have a tight, accurate, and efficient society which terminates crime at the cost of invading people's natural rights. No, a totally protective government should not be apart of our current society. Our society loves our freedom and may not be willing to sacrifice their privacy for a totally protective government. A totally protective government could have been used to find El Chapo when he was on the run. The scanning of irises and the 'spiders' that do so could have been used to track him down faster. The warm body technology which is used to sense how many people are in an area would be helpful to to find him in hiding. 

Ascher Levin-Minority Report

Pre-Crime as a totally protective government

Pre-Crime as a sign of a totally protective government

A protective government is when the government has a lot of safety protocols to make sure that everyone is safe. Also, a protective government makes sure that everyone has the things they need so everyone is okay. This was present in Minority Report because a representative came from the government to make sure that there weren’t any flaws in pre-crime.

A protective government should be in our world today because then a lot of people would get the things they need. Additionally, it would decrease the rate of crimes in the United States.

If this had been in place, people wouldn’t have been involved in the shooting in Pittsburgh because the government would make sure that you had to be checked out before you could enter the synagogue.

Juri Esteban

In my opinion I think Marcus Lemonis is better because he helps people by changing their business and making it better for them. He gives good advice and helps them build up their business. He helps by making their product popular. He helps by making people learn how to grow their business. He helps saving business. He covers the 5 P’s. He takes over you business and Improve it.  I’ll work with Marcus Lemonis because he will help me grow my product and make better things for me to sell my product and make people like my product. He will say what’s good and what’s wrong with my product.

Sam Marshall

With my company, NYFCo., a brand new successful company focused on our innovative technology within our fitness clothing, for us the best option would be the Shark Tank option. More specifically, Mark Cuban. Our company is already partnered with Daymond John so we are already marketed by the Brooklyn Nets. I chose to partner with Mark Cuban to access his connections with the Dallas Mavericks and hopefully in the future his other sports connections. With our company being successful and just in the growth/introductory phase, it is more important to receive the extra help or boost given by the sharks than the sort of restart given my Marcus Lemonis. The major difference between the sharks and Marcus Lemonis is the fact that Lemonis wants to own a close to 50% of the company. But with this 50%, he will not only obtain most of the leadership of the company and flip the course of the business, but he will upgrade everything in and about the business. The Sharks are more behind the scenes players. They handle money and investments and improving connections. Marcus Lemonis is not afraid to get his hands dirty and experience the work ethic of the company. The sharks sit on their high chairs and mainly look over everything. Lemonis will change the entire business model where the sharks are more of an extra boost, which is what my company could use.

Shark Tank vs Profit - Mateo Hain

            The better investor seems to be Marcus Lemonis. Lemonis uses his expertise to fix businesses and set them on the right track. For businesses who don't excel at business strategy, he can really help them fix the flaws with their process. Lemonis's strategy teaches the business owners new things, sets them on the right track to succeed in the future. Shark Tank investors don't want to spend their time guiding businesses, they want equity for their investment and want to keep their hands relatively clean. However, I think that the person that could benefit my product, the Survivalist Jacket, the most is Daymond John with Shark Tank. He can help me grow my product off of his name and his brand. If I can get a few tips for manufacturing clothing, I can make my profit margin better, and then use Daymond's connections in retail to sell my product. Lemonis is different from the Shark Tank investors because he chooses to take over businesses for a large amount of equity. He brings new ideas, and manages the staff, basically as a partner. The Sharks can make suggestions and bring connections but they stay away from the management of the business. The Sharks tend to take much less equity from companies, as well as invest a bit less money.