Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
But the governor can turn that on a dime

For thouands of years kings and dictators had the power of life and death over citizens. That was reduced with the Magna Carta and our founders were in agreement on only one real point. The executive of our states and nation, were not to have any direct power over citizens. Only judges and juries could have such power in our nation.

To believe that Govenrors and Presidents can take custody of individuals is just nuts. The one exception was non aligned combatants in military conflict. It used to be that those who engaged in combat with out being attached to a nations miliary had no rights. That was the basis of our holding the terrorists in cuba. But now that is being overturned by the courts.

No president has ever had the right to take charge of any citizen with out first gaining permission of the courts.

Some may not like the way our goverment works, but that is how it works. Nothing could be more dangerous than giving a President life and death control over citizens. Some president would figure out that all he had to do was kill those that disaggreed with him. That is what kings and dictators did for centuries.

Love it or hate it our personal freedom is in the hands of judges. It is judges that need to have their power curbed. Taking life and death power away from Presidents, kings and governors was the most important act to giving citizens any freedom.

427 posted on 03/23/2005 4:15:52 PM PST by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies ]


To: Common Tator

I can't even count the number of misconceptions in your post. The Gov/Prez would be saving, not killing anyone. The check is the legislature's impeachment power. And your history simply substitutes judges for kings, a pointless trade. Just rubbish.


448 posted on 03/23/2005 4:23:17 PM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

To: Common Tator

They took away the power of the executive to TAKE life, but they left the executive the power to prevent life from being taken, in the form of executive clemency. By doing so, I think it should be agreed that the executive should also have to power to grant clemency in a civil case where the judgement will result in the death of one of the involved parties. At least it should be agreed by rational, civilized and moral people.


466 posted on 03/23/2005 4:31:26 PM PST by Critter (America, home of the whipped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

To: Common Tator
Normally I would agree with you on principle, but here we have a case of the judiciary issuing orders to kill an innocent person. One principle of our government is a system of checks and balances to prevent precisely this kind of abuse. If one branch of government is abusing the citizens of the land (by killing them), the people who grant the government it's just powers to govern, the other branches are obliged to exercise some measure of oversight and restraint.

It is clear that this bloody business is getting out of hand. When you have the court passing de facto death sentences on innocent persons, something is out of kilter. The other branches of government, and, ultimately, the citizens who establish such government, would be remiss if they did not act to oppose such blatant abuses of the citizenry.

474 posted on 03/23/2005 4:34:00 PM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

To: Common Tator

Presidents and Governors take custody of individuals every day without first obtaining the permission of the courts. Have you ever seen a drunk driver arrested? Or a shoplifter picked up by the police? Sure, they have to be brought before a judge and formally charged, but that happens AFTER they are taken into custody, not before.


484 posted on 03/23/2005 4:37:19 PM PST by Edmund Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

To: Common Tator

And instead we have now the power of death placed in the hands of a judge. And this is an improvement?

Somehow arbitrary exercise of power is still evil and these judges who had nothing to lose by erring on the side of caution and humanity still exert their arrogant will no different from some ancient king and the result is the same for the powerless... Death!


503 posted on 03/23/2005 4:44:06 PM PST by Aloysius88 (Antonin Scalia for Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

To: Common Tator
were not to have any direct power over citizens.

Careful. Were not to have any direct power to *harm* citizens, not to *save* citizens.

-A8

566 posted on 03/23/2005 5:06:50 PM PST by adiaireton8 ("There is no greater evil one can suffer than to hate reasonable discourse." - Plato, Phaedo 89d)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson