Any Excuse to Disarm the Populace...

[J.T]

Joe Winslow, a member of the Quartzsite, Arizona Town Council, has sworn out a protective order complaint against a local political activist who has been strenuously objecting to what the activist claims are the Council's heavy-handed and legally questionable activities. In a hearing the council member compared the activist and his associates to terrorist groups like Germany's Baader-Meinhof gang and Peru's Shining Path, saying that he believed that they were moving from complaining to confrontation and that the next step would be violence. He requested that the judge ban the man from City Hall and prohibit him from possessing firearms or ammunition. The judge granted his request.
Consider the ramifications of this court order. A local politician convinced a court to forbid that person from being within the immediate vicinity of this public servant and to suspend the constituent's constitutional rights indefinitely. This, because he didn't like being confronted with tough questions from that constituent.


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=331697

Because fuck the Second Amendment and fuck the People...

[ConHog]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=331697

Because fuck the Second Amendment and fuck the People...

The NRA will be on this like white on rice. A totally unconstitutional ruling. That judge should be disbarred IMMEDIATELY.

[Gaffer]

That judge, and I use term loosely, way overstepped his authority. The next election he probably wouldn't want this brought out.

[ConHog]

That judge, and I use term loosely, way overstepped his authority. The next election he probably wouldn't want this brought out.


It just boggles my mind that a judge wouldn't know that they are stomping the COTUS when they issue an order from the bench demanding that a private citizen turn over their firearms. If I were that man I 'd make them come to my home and take them by force. I wouldn't fire on them, but I'd have someone there videotaping it and I'd make them tear my house apart looking for guns.

Then I'd sue them until there wasn't anything left to sue.

[Gaffer]

It just boggles my mind that a judge wouldn't know that they are stomping the COTUS when they issue an order from the bench demanding that a private citizen turn over their firearms. If I were that man I 'd make them come to my home and take them by force. I wouldn't fire on them, but I'd have someone there videotaping it and I'd make them tear my house apart looking for guns.

Then I'd sue them until there wasn't anything left to sue.

I agree and I would sue the judge personally. He needs to be disbarred as he doesn't have any concept of the law. Just another liberal activist helping his liberal politician friend.

[ConHog]

I agree and I would sue the judge personally. He needs to be disbarred as he doesn't have any concept of the law. Just another liberal activist helping his liberal politician friend.

I'm fairly certain the Judge will be indemned against personal liability. But I damn sure would be taking him before the bar association.

[KartRacerBoy]

Gun nuts, get out your ammunition.

I don't exactly trust the link, Knoxnews. I don't know if the judge was right or wrong, but the story is horribly written from a legal standpoint. No doubt some will call up their militiias based on this story, but I bet it's more a tempest in a teapot than anything else.

[logroller]

Now that the pipeline from the ATF is dry, they have to find other means of funneling guns to the drug cartels.

[fj1200]

Quartzsite, AZ seems to be a seriously F'ed up berg.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=326601

N (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=326601)ot that I want to get news from WND but some may remember this one.

'Nazi' police 'kidnap' woman at town hall (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=319501)

[logroller]

Quartzsite, AZ seems to be a seriously F'ed up berg.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=326601

N (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=326601)ot that I want to get news from WND but some may remember this one.

'Nazi' police 'kidnap' woman at town hall (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=319501)


After reading the first article, it appears they have violated the first, second,fourth and fifth amendments. I mean, why not just move the local police officers into his house to make it a clean sweep. On a personal high note, this is a devastating blow to those proponents of gun control whose interpretation of the 2nd Amendment's "well-regulated militia" is akin to law enforcement. Whatever passes as a court of law in this place seems pretty backwoods, even to ConHog.:laugh: though Hog, it said the judge wasn't a lawyer, just an elected official.

Not surprisingly, there's a pending investigation into the city by the State Attn Gen.

“Normally, we do not release the results of an investigation until it has been completed. However, because this is a matter of unusual public interest, we are prepared to say that, based on review of a video of a July 10 meeting, there is reasonable cause to believe that there has been a violation of the Open Meeting Law, inasmuch as the public was excluded. The meeting was held under the misconception that an emergency meeting can be conducted without the public present. Independently of the question of whether the Town Council had a legitimate reason to hold an emergency meeting, even proper emergency meetings must allow the public to be present. The exception is if there is a legitimate basis for an executive session, and the City Council did not attempt to hold a proper executive session during the emergency meeting. The investigation of this and other alleged violations of Open Meeting Laws is ongoing.”
http://www.azag.gov/press_releases/july/2011/110729%20Open%20Meeting%20Law.html

[SassyLady]

I've spent a couple of nights in Quartzsite, AZ on my way to Tucson. It's nothing but a bunch of RVs sitting in the middle of the desert and most of the businesses cater to RVers. I was surprised to hear they have a town council, much less a judge.

Sounds like a personal feud between some old farts.

[logroller]

I've spent a couple of nights in Quartzsite, AZ on my way to Tucson. It's nothing but a bunch of RVs sitting in the middle of the desert and most of the businesses cater to RVers. I was surprised to hear they have a town council, much less a judge.

Sounds like a personal feud between some old farts.

I think you've described about half the townships in Arizona. And personal feuds among old farts extend all the way to the US Congress.:coffee:


Hey ConHog, you're from AR, correct? You know anything about the city of Gould, whose council passed an ordinance...


..disbanding a citizens group, forbidding the Mayor from meeting with people and stopping any groups from forming if members discuss the city without council approval
http://www.fox16.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=2664569

[Binky]

I've spent a couple of nights in Quartzsite, AZ on my way to Tucson. It's nothing but a bunch of RVs sitting in the middle of the desert and most of the businesses cater to RVers. I was surprised to hear they have a town council, much less a judge.

Sounds like a personal feud between some old farts.

Sounds like a place I won't be rushing to spend time in anytime soon. If I wanted to plant my butt in the middle of a compound of RVs, I'd drive it to a state park, hook up to the electric and dive into the pool or lake. I would not be sitting in the middle of a vast dust bowl arguing over who's fart made the better impact. :laugh2:

[KartRacerBoy]

Sounds like a place I won't be rushing to spend time in anytime soon. If I wanted to plant my butt in the middle of a compound of RVs, I'd drive it to a state park, hook up to the electric and dive into the pool or lake. I would not be sitting in the middle of a vast dust bowl arguing over who's fart made the better impact. :laugh2:

Better? I don't know butt mine would make the loudest.

[ConHog]

After reading the first article, it appears they have violated the first, second,fourth and fifth amendments. I mean, why not just move the local police officers into his house to make it a clean sweep. On a personal high note, this is a devastating blow to those proponents of gun control whose interpretation of the 2nd Amendment's "well-regulated militia" is akin to law enforcement. Whatever passes as a court of law in this place seems pretty backwoods, even to ConHog.:laugh: though Hog, it said the judge wasn't a lawyer, just an elected official.

Not surprisingly, there's a pending investigation into the city by the State Attn Gen.

http://www.azag.gov/press_releases/july/2011/110729%20Open%20Meeting%20Law.html



Another reason judges shouldn't be elected, and they most definitely should have law degrees.

[KartRacerBoy]

Another reason judges shouldn't be elected, and they most definitely should have law degrees.

I agree with law degrees but elected? Either way (appointed or elected), you still seem to end up with the same types as judges. Politically connected. The county I used to work in had elected judges. The county I live in has appointed ones. Both are just political cronies and some are good and some bad. Luck of the draw, really. Judicial candidates are so restricted in what they can say in an election by Judicial ethics rules that elections seem to be mostly based name recognition. Appointments are based on largely who is in the "in" crowd in the legal world.

[J.T]

Another reason judges shouldn't be elected

Appointed, then? Wouldn't that make it harder to get rid of the bad ones?

[ConHog]

Appointed, then? Wouldn't that make it harder to get rid of the bad ones?

I would think it would make it easier. A Governor can unilaterally fire an appointed official. An elected official however..............

[J.T]

I would think it would make it easier. A Governor can unilaterally fire an appointed official. An elected official however..............

Elected, we can all vote on each judge. Appointed, we must elect a governor who can be made to make it a priority to fire a judge and appoint a new one. Even if the governor can afford to do so politically, we have to convince the governor that it's worth getting around to when there are likely to be bigger political issues to deal with. This, plus the possible political connections involved, could serve to protect bad judges and make them harder to get rid of.

[fj1200]

I would think it would make it easier. A Governor can unilaterally fire an appointed official. An elected official however..............

That would make them highly subject to political whims then. How about appointed for a set period of time or elected subject to removal by a Governor?

[logroller]

That would make them highly subject to political whims then. How about appointed for a set period of time or elected subject to removal by a Governor?

Appointed until the next general election.--That's how my county does it.

Is quartzsite trying this for their chief of police?

http://freedomfighterradio.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/35lerw1312648037.jpg

[ConHog]

That would make them highly subject to political whims then. How about appointed for a set period of time or elected subject to removal by a Governor?

Either one would be acceptable to me. I just don't like the idea of a judge being uneducated in the law and elected by people who likewise are uneducated in the law.

[KartRacerBoy]

Elected, we can all vote on each judge. Appointed, we must elect a governor who can be made to make it a priority to fire a judge and appoint a new one. Even if the governor can afford to do so politically, we have to convince the governor that it's worth getting around to when there are likely to be bigger political issues to deal with. This, plus the possible political connections involved, could serve to protect bad judges and make them harder to get rid of.

Having folks vote for a judge? Again, it's almost always a populatirty contest. Judcial candidates can't really take positions on anything due to ethics rules. So it comes down to which candidate has the most money to get name recognition. Then if a judge does something that follows the law but is unpopular, he can voted out. That's why federal judges have life terms.

[logroller]

Either one would be acceptable to me. I just don't like the idea of a judge being uneducated in the law and elected by people who likewise are uneducated in the law.

the blind leading the blind...making lawyers like service animals; as you don't want too many in the same room, it's a health hazard.:laugh2:

[gabosaurus]

The entire state of Arizona is known for fucking with legalities and abuses of the law. Why should one small city be any different?
I am surprised that Charlton Heston has not already smited the place with a plague of locusts.

[J.T]

Either one would be acceptable to me. I just don't like the idea of a judge being uneducated in the law and elected by people who likewise are uneducated in the law.

So the People are too ignorant to be permitted to choose their judges, basically?

[ConHog]

So the People are too ignorant to be permitted to choose their judges, basically?

For the most part "the People" are too ignorant to be allowed to vote if you ask me.

[J.T]

For the most part "the People" are too ignorant to be allowed to vote if you ask me.

And you're just the one to rule over them, right? :rolleyes:

[ConHog]

And you're just the one to rule over them, right? :rolleyes:

Sir, I never said that. I never even said that elections shouldn't happen. I DID however say that most Americans should be disqualified from said voting.

[J.T]

Sir, I never said that. I never even said that elections shouldn't happen. I DID however say that most Americans should be disqualified from said voting.
Yes, only the 'Right' people should be allowed to vote (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/392598/july-20-2011/voter-id-laws), right? :rolleyes:

[Gaffer]

Yes, only the 'Right' people should be allowed to vote (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/392598/july-20-2011/voter-id-laws), right? :rolleyes:

No, only informed people.

[ConHog]

Yes, only the 'Right' people should be allowed to vote (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/392598/july-20-2011/voter-id-laws), right? :rolleyes:



That is correct. Only white, male landowners should be able to vote. That is EXACTLY what I said. :cuckoo:

[ConHog]

No, only informed people.



Well, guess JT is disqualified.

[J.T]

No, only informed people.

Interesting. There goes everyone watching Fox 'News'. :laugh:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/study-finds-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-issues-20101217-105021-923.html

[fj1200]

Interesting. There goes everyone watching Fox 'News'. :laugh:

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/study-finds-fox-news-viewers-most-misinformed-issues-20101217-105021-923.html

Wow, you'll buy anything. That study equated misinformed with not buying the government line; seems they were most informed in retrospect eh?

[fj1200]

So the People are too ignorant to be permitted to choose their judges, basically?

So in one thread you complain about the ignorance of the people and now you think that we should leave judge selection to them? So you have no core beliefs do you?

[ConHog]

So in one thread you complain about the ignorance of the people and now you think that we should leave judge selection to them? So you have no core beliefs do you?

Hey JT, That just happened......

[logroller]

Hey JT, That just happened......
he's the king of quote f'ing after all!

[ConHog]

he's the king of quote f'ing after all!

He's something alright.