tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post8010020008409716123..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: A couple of Supreme Court Justices on the Second AmendmentAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-20519977909602111352014-02-01T16:02:34.040+01:002014-02-01T16:02:34.040+01:00"You mean that just because we've been do..."You mean that just because we've been doing it for a long time makes it more right?"<br /><br />That's a question of right , or wrong, a moral question.<br />For the lying criminal coward who doesn't know what morals are and promotes circumventing the law. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28554576134342088122014-02-01T01:18:50.191+01:002014-02-01T01:18:50.191+01:00Yep, a country full of Mark Kesslers and his type ...Yep, a country full of Mark Kesslers and his type of irresponsible thinking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-52933769378496160742014-01-31T21:03:57.492+01:002014-01-31T21:03:57.492+01:00This is what you call the downside of government e...This is what you call the downside of government employee unions. A set procedure is implemented in the area of terminations and grievances which often involves arbitration and there will be times when things don't work as intended. The same occurs with enacted legislation also.<br /> The courts have even found that law enforcement has no legal responsibility to protect individuals. A sheriff is an elected position and enjoys protections given by law. <br /> You can be assured that if there was a legal requirement to enforce laws, the Sates Attorney Generals would have not wasted time in using the courts to remedy these law enforcement leaders' defiance.ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-27104001764822004002014-01-31T19:43:30.506+01:002014-01-31T19:43:30.506+01:00So the spirit of the law no longer exist, just law...So the spirit of the law no longer exist, just lawyer up and play word games while idiotic events continue. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-5355334850355174552014-01-30T19:16:02.907+01:002014-01-30T19:16:02.907+01:00Kessler was a police chief and therefor had to go ...Kessler was a police chief and therefor had to go through a termination process likely driven by a union. A sheriff also has a termination process called an election.ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-57828464213272448002014-01-30T19:09:58.720+01:002014-01-30T19:09:58.720+01:00A country full of Mark Kesslers, great. A country full of Mark Kesslers, great. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-31547977757209394242014-01-30T10:05:56.531+01:002014-01-30T10:05:56.531+01:00He's asking a moral question of right and wron...He's asking a moral question of right and wrong. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-40554991006078118402014-01-30T08:51:46.267+01:002014-01-30T08:51:46.267+01:00I like "one of the greatest pieces of fraud.&...I like "one of the greatest pieces of fraud." I call it "bastardized."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-15114470211202119802014-01-30T07:38:12.634+01:002014-01-30T07:38:12.634+01:00No, Anonymous, Sarge was asking if you're comm...No, Anonymous, Sarge was asking if you're committing the fallacy of the faulty appeal to tradition.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-79030545562143626512014-01-30T06:04:55.771+01:002014-01-30T06:04:55.771+01:00A sheriff is not required to enforce all laws. Fo...A sheriff is not required to enforce all laws. For example, Sheriff John B. Cooke of Weld County Colorado has been in the news lately due to his stated refusal to enforce two recently passed gun laws.<br /> But if you look at the oath of office he swore, there is nothing in there that requires him to enforce laws,<br /><br />"As required by the Colorado Constitution, Sheriffs take an Oath of Office. Sheriff Cooke’s oath was as follows:<br />“I, John B. Cooke, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Colorado, the Home Rule Charter for Weld County, Colorado; the Ordinances of Weld County, Colorado, and that I will faithfully perform the duties of the Office of County Sheriff, of the County of Weld, State of Colorado, upon which I enter.”<br />This oath did not require Sheriff Cooke to enforce all state statutes."<br />http://www.volokh.com/2013/12/17/colorado-sheriffs-duty-enforce-statutes/<br /><br /> Its sort of an assumption, just like some assume that the police are required to protect you. If the voters disapprove of his policies, their remedy is to vote him out of office at the next election. Unless of course, he does something illegal.<br /> And if a Sheriff feels that a law violates the constitution, it would violate his or her oath to enforce it.<br />ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-60239662193700127552014-01-30T05:46:22.359+01:002014-01-30T05:46:22.359+01:00So because a sheriff disagrees with a law, he has ...So because a sheriff disagrees with a law, he has no obligation to enforce that law? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-60591884061835560822014-01-30T05:43:32.081+01:002014-01-30T05:43:32.081+01:00"You mean that just because we've been do..."You mean that just because we've been doing it for a long time makes it more right?"<br /><br />That's a statement of emotion. It does not reflect what the law is. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-69919731333215955222014-01-30T02:18:58.396+01:002014-01-30T02:18:58.396+01:00Emotional response? What is that supposed to mean...Emotional response? What is that supposed to mean? Sarge and I are using facts and legal reasoning here.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-16178539688178598992014-01-29T23:42:26.430+01:002014-01-29T23:42:26.430+01:00"Just because a law says it's OK doesn..."Just because a law says it's OK doesn't mean it's morally correct."<br /><br /> I couldn't agree with you more Anon. In fact, there are a number of Sheriffs that feel the way about the Second Amendment.ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-6433346909306447192014-01-29T23:13:01.872+01:002014-01-29T23:13:01.872+01:00You seem to confuse the law with morality. Just be...You seem to confuse the law with morality. Just because a law says it's OK doesn't mean it's morally correct. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-12824043875730876442014-01-29T23:04:24.841+01:002014-01-29T23:04:24.841+01:00Not at all and your emotional response does not re...Not at all and your emotional response does not reflect my opinions. <br />I meant what I said. It should be debated, challenged. Roe/Wade has been debated and challenged since its passing. Some are still trying to overturn it, even though the Chief of the Supreme Court has said it is precedent and decided law, that he will not revisit. In fact the opposition is counting on a change by the Court to overturn it. It's law, which does not make it morally right, or wrong. Slavery was protected by the law also and Lincoln thought it's immorality deserved a full war. That's politics, not the law accepting slavery. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-65194250959153992412014-01-29T22:57:56.008+01:002014-01-29T22:57:56.008+01:00Very True Greg. In fact, it will be interesting t...Very True Greg. In fact, it will be interesting to see what happens in Heller II.ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-78162024855264489112014-01-29T22:56:14.041+01:002014-01-29T22:56:14.041+01:00The Court in fact worked hard not to answer the qu...The Court in fact worked hard not to answer the question of the nature of the Second Amendment. Heller forced the issue, since Heller himself was not a criminal seeking to get out of a conviction, and McDonald derives from Heller. Once a right is recognized, the Fourteenth Amendment pretty much guarantees that the right applies to all and everywhere.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-26447671825725299302014-01-29T22:38:31.666+01:002014-01-29T22:38:31.666+01:00"One court decision against centuries of acce..."One court decision against centuries of accepted court decisions finding a different interpretation, should be challenged, vigorously. These sudden changes are usually due to politics, not an intellectual interpretation of legal documents."<br /><br /> You mean that just because we've been doing it for a long time makes it more right? Would that also justify continued defiance and challenge to Roe V Wade? Or Brown vs Board of Education? <br /> Mike is counting on the political aspect of the court to eventually result in a reversing of Heller and McDonald. Is that a good thing?ssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-71768111270522254572014-01-29T22:25:00.045+01:002014-01-29T22:25:00.045+01:00"In the most controversial ruling of his term... <br /><br />"In the most controversial ruling of his term, Roe v. Wade (1973), Burger voted with the majority to recognize a broad right to privacy that prohibited states from banning abortions. However, Burger abandoned Roe v. Wade by the time of Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists."<br /><br />"Burger was opposed to gay rights as he wrote a famous concurring opinion in the Court's 1986 decision upholding a Georgia law criminalizing sodomy (Bowers v. Hardwick), in which Burger purported to marshal historical evidence that laws criminalizing homosexuality were of ancient vintage. "<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_E._Burgerssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-4514757639317834772014-01-29T22:21:48.820+01:002014-01-29T22:21:48.820+01:00If an accepted interpretation of a Constitutional ...If an accepted interpretation of a Constitutional amendment suddenly changes after so long, it is totally up for debate and scrutiny. One court decision against centuries of accepted court decisions finding a different interpretation, should be challenged, vigorously. These sudden changes are usually due to politics, not an intellectual interpretation of legal documents. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-86511679414176877282014-01-29T22:17:33.438+01:002014-01-29T22:17:33.438+01:00An interesting set of priorities.
" But i... An interesting set of priorities.<br /><br /> " But if watering-down is the mood of the day, I would prefer to water down the Second rather than the Fourth Amendment. I share with Judge Friendly a concern that the easy extension of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, to "possessory offenses" is a serious intrusion on Fourth Amendment safeguards."<br /><br />"Ultimately, he believed that a judge's role was "not neutral." "The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people..."<br /><br />"In 1944 Douglas voted with the majority to uphold Japanese wartime internment, in Korematsu v. United States, but over the course of his career he grew to become a leading advocate of individual rights. Suspicious of majority rule as it related to social and moral questions, he frequently expressed concern at forced conformity with "the Establishment" in his opinions."<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_O._Douglasssgmarkcrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14480230040370709682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-44940158949006729502014-01-29T21:57:21.958+01:002014-01-29T21:57:21.958+01:00Laci, whatever you believe about past gun rulings,...Laci, whatever you believe about past gun rulings, don't you have to acknowledge that an individual right is now settled law? If it's true about Obamacare, it's true about Heller and McDonald.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-88154388074498680272014-01-29T19:36:48.974+01:002014-01-29T19:36:48.974+01:00Living in the past Laci.Living in the past Laci.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-26177718221990270262014-01-29T18:57:47.227+01:002014-01-29T18:57:47.227+01:00How original Laci, this is only the tenth time you...How original Laci, this is only the tenth time you've rehashed Burger and his failed argument.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com