Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: why the courts should be irrelevant about the law/constitution

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,479
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default why the courts should be irrelevant about the law/constitution

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgel...-ground-state/

    Since American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms (not just law enforcement officials, as gun control advocates maintain), it would seem to follow that they’re entitled to use their weapons when they are threatened.

    Gyrell Lee had been celebrating New Year’s Eve with his cousin Jamiel Walker in the latter’s home. Throughout the evening, a known troublemaker, Quinton Epps, came by and argued with Walker. When Epps returned with friends and became increasingly belligerent, Lee decided that he should get his gun from his car just in case matters got worse. Lee had completed his concealed carry class and was familiar with the law on gun use.

    Epps returned once more and a shouting match between himself and Walker ensued in the street. Walker lost his temper and punched Epps, at which point Epps drew a pistol and shot Walker in the stomach. Walker fell and Epps then turned his gun on Lee, who had his gun out. Lee fired and killed Epps.

    Lee was subsequently arrested and charged with second-degree murder. He was a bystander who had acted in self-defense, but nevertheless local officials wanted to make an example of him.

    At trial, Lee’s attorney argued that he had acted in self-defense. But in charging the jury, the judge failed to make any mention of the state’s “stand your ground” law or the defendant’s right to use force in the defense of his cousin (who had died of his wounds). The jury returned a verdict of guilty.

    On appeal, the North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the conviction, holding that the trial judge had not committed “plain error” in charging the jury without bringing up the state’s “stand your ground” statute. In pertinent part, that law reads “A person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if …he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another.” The Court of Appeals wasn’t convinced that the judge had made an error because it wasn’t sure that the statute applied in Lee’s case due to its uncertainty that a public street outside his home counted as “a place he had the lawful right to be.”
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,965
    Thanks
    12,108
    Thanked 14,172 Times in 10,390 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Opinion piece.

    The jury and the courts apparently disagree with Leef on the imminent danger thing.

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,479
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    Opinion piece.

    The jury and the courts apparently disagree with Leef on the imminent danger thing.
    read the bolded piece. in fact, let me put it here for your idiot mind to try to digest.......

    The Court of Appeals wasn’t convinced that the judge had made an error because it wasn’t sure that the statute applied in Lee’s case due to its uncertainty that a public street outside his home counted as “a place he had the lawful right to be"
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  4. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,965
    Thanks
    12,108
    Thanked 14,172 Times in 10,390 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    read the bolded piece. in fact, let me put it here for your idiot mind to try to digest.......

    The Court of Appeals wasn’t convinced that the judge had made an error because it wasn’t sure that the statute applied in Lee’s case due to its uncertainty that a public street outside his home counted as “a place he had the lawful right to be"
    Review the case, idiot. He carried a gun several houses down the street and the only witness said he came out of nowhere to shoot Epps.

    Were you on the jury?

  5. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,479
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    were YOU, you fucking moron? when you can pull the governments cock out of your mouth, come back and talk.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  6. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,965
    Thanks
    12,108
    Thanked 14,172 Times in 10,390 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    were YOU, you fucking moron? when you can pull the governments cock out of your mouth, come back and talk.
    Translation = SMY wasn't on the jury and is just another limpdick barrel-stroker.

    Why do you hate the jury system, bitch?

  7. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,479
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    i'm sorry, i can't understand anything with your mouth full of uncle sams penis
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  8. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,965
    Thanks
    12,108
    Thanked 14,172 Times in 10,390 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    i'm sorry, i can't understand anything with your mouth full of uncle sams penis
    Juries are on the US payroll? What the fuck country do you live in, dimwit?

    It's always the same with you RW flaccids. When it's a verdict you don't like, which appears to be most, it's always those unelected tyrants in black robes. You're so predictable, bitch, it's boring.

    Hey, I keep looking for the article about some dumbfuck in Backwater, USA getting arrested for carrying his peashooter into the courthouse. What's the matter, pusswipe? Too chickenshit to back up your half-assed words?

    lol

  9. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    I might be movin to Montana
    Posts
    24,947
    Thanks
    7,072
    Thanked 10,611 Times in 7,328 Posts
    Groans
    68
    Groaned 1,966 Times in 1,782 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    read the bolded piece. in fact, let me put it here for your idiot mind to try to digest.......

    The Court of Appeals wasn’t convinced that the judge had made an error because it wasn’t sure that the statute applied in Lee’s case due to its uncertainty that a public street outside his home counted as “a place he had the lawful right to be"
    This was just like the SYG case here in Houston a few years ago.

    Firefighter thought his neighbors party was too loud so he goes down the street and asks him to turn it down.

    Neighbors continue partying LOUDLY so fireman grabs his gun and heads down the street to complain again.

    Neighbor goes outside to talk to the upset fireman and when he approached the crybaby, who was in the street by the way, the coward firefighter
    pulls his gun and shoots.

    He too was found GUILTY.
    What kind of country have we become?

    One in which federal prosecutors can take “evidence” before a “grand jury,”

    and that grand jury can “vote to indict” a former president for 91 alleged “crimes”?

  10. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    48,965
    Thanks
    12,108
    Thanked 14,172 Times in 10,390 Posts
    Groans
    45
    Groaned 4,876 Times in 4,194 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZappasGuitar View Post
    This was just like the SYG case here in Houston a few years ago.

    Firefighter thought his neighbors party was too loud so he goes down the street and asks him to turn it down.

    Neighbors continue partying LOUDLY so fireman grabs his gun and heads down the street to complain again.

    Neighbor goes outside to talk to the upset fireman and when he approached the crybaby, who was in the street by the way, the coward firefighter
    pulls his gun and shoots.

    He too was found GUILTY.
    He's merely another RW barrel stroker who thinks packing 24/7 is the answer to everything.

  11. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,479
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    how the fuck do you two brain dead morons overlook the FACT that the appeals court decided YOU, or any OTHER american citizen, MAY NOT have a right to be in a public place???????
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

Similar Threads

  1. The Hubris of the Irrelevant Press
    By tsuke in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-03-2017, 02:09 PM
  2. Fox becoming as irrelevant as Truth Detector
    By Rune in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 03-11-2014, 08:35 PM
  3. that whole 'courts interpret the constitution' thingy????
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-27-2013, 03:44 PM
  4. S&P Irrelevant?
    By Cancel 2018. 3 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-13-2012, 09:43 PM
  5. The most irrelevant man in America, 1/4/08
    By Onceler in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-04-2008, 05:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •