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

To: coloradan; palmer
Per your being against speed limits Instead, I mentioned reckless driving once, and "excessive speeding" once, both of which should be up to the police and/or judges to determine on a case-by-case basis under the prevailing conditions of traffic and weather.

Started out that you thought that this was a bad analogy. I guess now you are feeling pressured into trying to be consistent. Luckily, you took the bait, but that's the point of analogies, it forces a person to admit the errors of their logic OR in your case, make really absurd assertions in order to be consistent. You did a fine job so far.

What other violations should be left up to a policeman and a judge to decide on a case-by-case basis?

I still can't believe you are actually advocating breaking the country up into legal fiefdoms. You whine that the laws on pot smoking and speeding just exist to harass people, and then you want to reinstate the Sheriff of Nottingham system. I'll take a uniform law that applies to everyone equally. I forget does that make me a tyrant or a bigot in your world?

Truly now, is the sky blue there?

116 posted on 06/08/2006 9:43:25 AM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: SampleMan
So you prefer subjective rule by a few to uniform laws. Well that indeed is an answer. An incredibly unworkable idea full of selective enforcement and unknowable limits, but an answer.

First, that's a straw man, because I don't support replacing all uniform laws, e.g. against murder. So take that dog elsewhere. Second, it's already the case with crimes involving negligence or recklessness. You support those laws, don't you? Or do you?

What other violations should be left up to a policeman and a judge to decide on a case-by-case basis?

Oh, oh, oh. Tsk, tsk, tsk! Did we forget that it takes convincing a jury of one's peers to obtain a criminal conviction? As is the case with other crimes of negligence and recklessness? Too bad.... well, let me remind you. Because you used to know it, earlier in the thread.

I still can't believe you are actually advocating breaking the country up into legal fiefdoms. You whine that the laws on pot smoking and speeding just exist to harass people, and then you want to reinstate the Sheriff of Nottingham system. I'll take a uniform law that applies to everyone equally.

So, I guess you oppose laws against negligence and recklessness then. Or maybe you just can't remember about the jury system. Maybe your brain is fried.

I forget does that make me a tyrant or a bigot in your world?

Do you have dictionaries in your world? You can look it up and see whether you are or not.

122 posted on 06/09/2006 6:28:19 AM PDT by coloradan (Failing to protect the liberties of your enemies establishes precedents that will reach to yourself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | 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