Because the judge had no reason or cause to lecture a LAW ABIDING CITIZEN like a headmaster, that’s why.
He should have lectured and censured the sheriff, not the citizen who only availed herself of a sacrosanct God-given right.
But he didn’t. Just another jerk in a black robe.
Q: “What do you say to a lawyer with an IQ of 50?
A: “Good morning, Your Honor.”
It is obvious that you haven't spent much time in courtrooms.
<>He should have lectured and censured the sheriff, not the citizen who only availed herself of a sacrosanct God-given right.
But he didn’t.
How do you know he didn't? And, it's even possible he figured that his publicly overruling the heriff's stupidity was enough.
Just another jerk in a black robe.
Could be. I'll save my opinion until I know a bit more than shown so far. Q: “What do you say to a lawyer with an IQ of 50?
A: “Good morning, Your Honor.”
That is quite often the case.
And, by the way, the right to own and carry a weapon is not a sacrosanct God-given right -- it is a right granted by the 2nd Amendment ro the Constitution.