tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post5978356850637680776..comments2023-10-20T05:43:46.254-07:00Comments on All Allan: Adventures in lawUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-89655943848688112802009-05-12T10:31:00.000-07:002009-05-12T10:31:00.000-07:00Okay, Allan. Uncle.
Thanks,
JohnOkay, Allan. Uncle. <br />Thanks,<br />JohnJohnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-42579176881274294132009-05-11T20:52:00.000-07:002009-05-11T20:52:00.000-07:00John, your list is in reverse chronological order...John, your list is in reverse chronological order. McCain-Fiengold is 3rd, at best. Both the <B>USA Patriot Act of 2001</B> and the <B>Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996</B> have eroded significantly more civil liberties then Feingold and when taken together, render the constitution nothing more then a lifeless, vague memory from a 1st year law course, an exercise in fiction to re-wire the brains of eager newbie law students.Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04435140994142833427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-90923971131825626502009-05-11T20:06:00.000-07:002009-05-11T20:06:00.000-07:00Perhaps you are correct -- someone might have been...Perhaps you are correct -- someone might have been wrongly convited because a juror didn't like being forced to serve, or vice(sp) versa. But if so, it means an argument can be made either way. It does not mean the guy who scofflawed, while improperly imprisoned, was correct in avoiding his duty "under the law." <br /><br />Since when does the Constitution get in the way of making laws? Let's make a list. A to Z or by order of importance? I'll start with Mccain/Feingold, an easy one.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-63065166640629237862009-05-10T19:14:00.000-07:002009-05-10T19:14:00.000-07:00John, just as likely that a disgruntled juror hol...John, just as likely that a disgruntled juror holds out and lets a felon free to harm another innocent victim, all because he/she is a juror against their will.<br /><br />As for the law, it is you my friend who wants to change it. I am fine with the 13th Amendment as written. If you want to force citizens to sit on juries against their will, I suggest you change the law to allow involuntary servitude in certain instances.Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04435140994142833427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-65217397825177044402009-05-10T18:28:00.000-07:002009-05-10T18:28:00.000-07:00I agree an error was made, but was it institutiona...I agree an error was made, but was it institutional or premeditated? What about the poor sap who might have been improperly convicted because this chump wasn't on the jury and some other bonehead was instead while he was trying to avoid his "duty." Perhaps, had he served on the jury, the innocent guy might have been exonerated or the guilty one might have actually been served justice. Many of the arguments made for getting out of jury duty seemed to be good arguments for having having those same people serve on a jury -- after all, they are so much more enlightened.<br /><br />Not buying the oppressor/victim argument. Change the law if you think jury duty is slavery or indentured servitude.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-38260646569792908332009-05-10T14:04:00.000-07:002009-05-10T14:04:00.000-07:00although a Stiff sentence.....possibly the poor so...although a Stiff sentence.....possibly the poor souls who are wrongly convicted of heinous crimes, receiving Life and sometimes Death sentences only to later have DNA proof that they hadn't committed the crime ....sometimes sitting in prison 10-20 years would be better served!!Garyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13752015473414453865noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9226230.post-2644061300890478442009-05-10T12:44:00.000-07:002009-05-10T12:44:00.000-07:00Thanks for sharing this story Allan. I agree, read...Thanks for sharing this story Allan. I agree, reading something like this leaves me fuming. I'd be all for it if you were to enjoy a "last hurrah" farewell tour to defend the "little guys" in the world....somebody has to. Long ago, the leaders of our country quit following the rule of law. It is time that someone defends it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com