The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**tyme** · March 5, 2014, 10:07 PM

Spats, re: trying to shoehorn objection to the firearms question on a federal jury questionnaire (which is taken online, link in jason_iowa's second post iirc, and requires selecting yes or no from a drop-down for whether there are guns in the household)...

The problem is, as I think we all acknowledge, there is no precedent (at least none I've seen cited) tying one of the rights, or expansions of rights (4th, 5th, "right to privacy", etc) to refusal to answer overbroad questions on a preliminary jury survey. So of course all such arguments are going to be without basis, until/unless someone challenges those bogus questions in court, and then the courts either will or won't find (I would hope they would) those questions to violate our right to privacy, or against self-incrimination, or some other right.

Whatever "need" the federal judiciary has to sift through potential jurors for gun cases can't possibly be met by questions about guns in the household. The questions aren't detailed enough to be useful for the purposes they'd presumably be used for, and they're an unnecessary privacy violation for jurors who aren't called or who are assigned to (the majority of) cases where gun ownership and RKBA opinions aren't relevant.

The other aspect of this is the 5th amendment situation. Because of Salinas, the rational thing to do is to declare the 5th amendment as a reason you're not answering, even if the 5th amendment doesn't apply. Since, if it does apply, and you don't mention the 5th amendment, your failure to answer might be used against you (or, in the case of a federal court form, perhaps if you get the wrong judge on the wrong day you'd be cited for contempt.)

If this all seems like unproductive fantasy to some of you lawyers, a) are questions about your guns and what you use them for on a general survey given to all prospective jurors acceptable to you; and b) if not, what would you do about it, if you were going to stand up for what you perceive to be your rights? Answer the questions, then take up the issue with the relevant authorities hoping to change the surveys for the future? That sort of non-confrontational approach may work better, but then you've answered the questions, allowing the government to violate your perceived rights.

March 5, 2014, 10:07 PM	#70
tyme Staff Join Date: October 13, 2001 Posts: 3,355	Spats, re: trying to shoehorn objection to the firearms question on a federal jury questionnaire (which is taken online, link in jason_iowa's second post iirc, and requires selecting yes or no from a drop-down for whether there are guns in the household)... The problem is, as I think we all acknowledge, there is no precedent (at least none I've seen cited) tying one of the rights, or expansions of rights (4th, 5th, "right to privacy", etc) to refusal to answer overbroad questions on a preliminary jury survey. So of course all such arguments are going to be without basis, until/unless someone challenges those bogus questions in court, and then the courts either will or won't find (I would hope they would) those questions to violate our right to privacy, or against self-incrimination, or some other right. Whatever "need" the federal judiciary has to sift through potential jurors for gun cases can't possibly be met by questions about guns in the household. The questions aren't detailed enough to be useful for the purposes they'd presumably be used for, and they're an unnecessary privacy violation for jurors who aren't called or who are assigned to (the majority of) cases where gun ownership and RKBA opinions aren't relevant. The other aspect of this is the 5th amendment situation. Because of Salinas, the rational thing to do is to declare the 5th amendment as a reason you're not answering, even if the 5th amendment doesn't apply. Since, if it does apply, and you don't mention the 5th amendment, your failure to answer might be used against you (or, in the case of a federal court form, perhaps if you get the wrong judge on the wrong day you'd be cited for contempt.) If this all seems like unproductive fantasy to some of you lawyers, a) are questions about your guns and what you use them for on a general survey given to all prospective jurors acceptable to you; and b) if not, what would you do about it, if you were going to stand up for what you perceive to be your rights? Answer the questions, then take up the issue with the relevant authorities hoping to change the surveys for the future? That sort of non-confrontational approach may work better, but then you've answered the questions, allowing the government to violate your perceived rights. __________________ “The egg hatched...” “...the egg hatched... and a hundred baby spiders came out...” (blade runner) “Who are you?” “A friend. I'm here to prevent you from making a mistake.” “You have no idea what I'm doing here, friend.” “In specific terms, no, but I swore an oath to protect the world...” (continuum) “It's a goal you won't understand until later. Your job is to make sure he doesn't achieve the goal.” (bsg) Last edited by tyme; March 6, 2014 at 09:19 AM.