New Attorney General: What can we expect? - Page 2

Al Norris · February 4, 2009, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 405boy

Dont just sit back and ask for everyone else to do your research.

Let me introduce you to the art of debate.

You made a statement. You stated that "fiat law" could change the 2A right.

I asked you to explain what "fiat law" was. You replied with a link that doesn't explain what you think it means.

I asked you to cite the portion of Heller that backs up your argument. To this you respond with a link to a blog!! ??? Dated 3 months before the decision!

No, no, and no.

When you make a statement, as you did, and someone asks you to back it up, it is upon you to make good the argument. It is not mine, nor anyones elses job to make you argument for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 405boy

Basically if you even start to regulate a right it is no longer a right but a privelage that can be changed, you simply open it up to debate and then you are screwed.

Sorry, but you are 100% wrong. All rights are regulated to one extent or another. The founders themselves never believed that rights are absolute, why is it that you (and several others) seem to think that all of a sudden they are?

And then there was the "gold fringe...." **sigh** ....405boy, don't answer any of the above, it was all rhetorical.

OK, everyone. Enough with the side bar. Let's get back to the OP.

B. Lahey · February 4, 2009, 10:50 PM

Mostly got that from the reading for my classes last year. We read British cases in Criminal Law (stranded sailors chose and shot a cabin boy in the head and ate him instead of drawing lots and eating him, this was deemed murderous), and Property Law (something about chasing foxes), and Contracts (something about a mill driveshaft, early consiquential damages case). All those cases are still cited, and I've had a few professors go on long winded rants about the history of the British and American legal traditions.

Didn't read any maritime law cases until this semester and have never heard it referenced as a source of American law.

Read a few French cases when I did a semester at Loyola New Orleans. Fun stuff.

405boy · February 5, 2009, 12:31 AM

Antipitas

Thanks so much for your kind statements, I will make sure to completely honor them and make sure too never ever again attempt to debate on any subject here. You are right I am wrong, now I must go and lick my wounds. Have a nice day.

Bartholomew Roberts · February 5, 2009, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Didn't read any maritime law cases until this semester and have never heard it referenced as a source of American law.

That is because by and large it isn't. The "gold fringe on the flag" thing is a popular argument among certain tiny segments of the population who have very unique and unsupported beliefs regarding how our legal system works.

It is basically a case of the gullible being led by the legally savvy. Kind of like if I took a lighter to start a fire when you were using flint and stone and when you asked me how I did it, I explained that tiny fire spirits were trapped by my powerful magic and if you did what I told you, you could trap the tiny spirits too. You end up doing a lot of what I tell you to do; but strangely enough it never works as well for you as it does for me.

An excellent example is a recent tax-protestor case. The "sovereign citizen" in question was a real attorney and so knew the actual law. He was charged with several tax crimes. He managed to get the prosecutor to drop all of them but "Failure to file" and then successfully convinced the jury that he did not know he had to file taxes in that particular circumstance. From a legal maneuvering standpoint, very innovative... though of course, he still has to pay the taxes and will likely be disbarred. However, when he gets interviewed after the case, he claims that as a sovereign citizen he doesn't have to pay taxes and the jury couldn't find anything saying he had to pay taxes and basically completely misstates how he won his case. The people who follow this guy only know that he got off - they don't know or understand the legal maneuvering that got him off - and here he is telling them that what he is teaching them will help them avoid taxes too. It won't though - they will go to jail because they don't know crap about the real legal system. They will stand there flicking their thumb and wondering why the fire spirits don't appear and then they'll just go to jail (after this guy fleeces them like sheep).

2rugers · February 5, 2009, 03:57 PM

UHHHH... Wrong Antipitas.
The founders did indeed believe certain rights are absolute that is why they wrote them down in the first place.

Al Norris · February 5, 2009, 04:44 PM

Since we can't seem to stay on topic...

Closed.

February 4, 2009, 10:50 PM	#27
B. Lahey Senior Member Join Date: March 17, 2008 Location: Indiana Posts: 2,857	Mostly got that from the reading for my classes last year. We read British cases in Criminal Law (stranded sailors chose and shot a cabin boy in the head and ate him instead of drawing lots and eating him, this was deemed murderous), and Property Law (something about chasing foxes), and Contracts (something about a mill driveshaft, early consiquential damages case). All those cases are still cited, and I've had a few professors go on long winded rants about the history of the British and American legal traditions. Didn't read any maritime law cases until this semester and have never heard it referenced as a source of American law. Read a few French cases when I did a semester at Loyola New Orleans. Fun stuff. __________________ "A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards." -George Orwell

February 5, 2009, 03:57 PM	#30
2rugers Senior Member Join Date: August 21, 2005 Location: texas Posts: 762	UHHHH... Wrong Antipitas. The founders did indeed believe certain rights are absolute that is why they wrote them down in the first place. __________________ Pain Is The Quickest Teacher 2RUGERS AKA "HALFCOCKED"

February 5, 2009, 12:31 AM	#28
405boy Member Join Date: January 8, 2009 Posts: 48	Antipitas Thanks so much for your kind statements, I will make sure to completely honor them and make sure too never ever again attempt to debate on any subject here. You are right I am wrong, now I must go and lick my wounds. Have a nice day.

February 5, 2009, 04:44 PM	#31
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	Since we can't seem to stay on topic... Closed.