Posted on 05/16/2002 3:05:12 AM PDT by LibertyRocks
And that is the understatement of the day.
Look at the structure of American government as laid out in the Constitution. If such sweeping changes as what you seek could be introduced so rapidly, then the nation would have collapsed well over a century ago--heck, we probably wouldn't have gone to 1861 without the Civil War, we would have had one before 1800.
Not at all. I was arguing with someone who thinks he ought to be able to decide Constitutionality of a law along with the guilt or innocence of a defendant.
Good grief. -- No rational juror would think he is deciding the final 'constitutionality' of a law, and certainly a judge could instuct the jury on that point.
The jury is to decide if the law in question applies to the defendant as charged, in ONLY that case. -- Thus, a defendant that is prevented from presenting a defense that includes his view of how the law applies, is being deprived of a FULL defense. --- His rights are being violated by the court itself.
This is simple common sense. - Which you statists certainly lack. - To the point of denying your own rights, as above.
His behavior leads me to believe he isn't wearing any pants behind that bench and his smirk means more than we realize.
Perhaps, but that is a different matter from nullification. The jury didn't arrive at their verdict because they disagreed with the law against murder or found it unjust.
What's wrong with a 3rd party? If the 2-party system is so great, why didn't the Founding Fathers just write it into the Constitution?
And if the existing parties are so rotten, then infiltrating and taking them over will be remarkably easy.
Your complaint is that it's really too much work.
Unfortunately, the LP can't agree on the color of the sky or the time of day. And they're too busy trying legalize pot and prostitution, wishing for more illegal immigrants, and defending your right to have your child pureed and sucked into a sink. I absolutely wish they'd get it together, but I think too many of them are little brain-addled from all the pot they smoke(d).
what a stupid thing to say. you are ridiculous!
Aye, that is a big part of the problem. The other part is people electing statists and collectivists who expand government at every opportunity.
You can vote for the people who will impeach those judges and replace them with those more in line with your beliefs.
And who might those candidates be? The last time I checked the inmates throughout government are guarding the cellblocks. Who do you trust or respect or think would impeach judges now? That asked in light of the long track-record wherein the inmates have permitted them to remain on the bench.
City employees have a vested interest (financial) in perpetuating the system. That makes them predujiced in favor of the state.
Oh, that's RIGHT! (Snaps fingers.) That's just too much like that dreaded four-letter word W-O-R-K.
Posted by VA Advogado #337
"Upon what do you base such an attack on Mr. Grant? Please be specific."
Raising issues irrelvant to the court proceeding. Juries make decisions of facts. They don't issue rulings of law. - VA -
Over-ruled by three USSC chief justices. - Try again, va-advocate 'EXchoir'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.