Jury Duty

[Berzerker]

Floyd

On the other hand, shouldn't jury trials be based solely upon the law?

The law and the accused must be judged or the government has effectively nullified the purpose of a jury - a check on or balance to federal/state power. The Framers knew mistakes would be made with their system, as with any system, but they definitely saw juries as necessary to keep govenrment under control as well as criminals. Once the politicians become judge, jury and executioner we're in trouble...

I'm not sure that I want a panel of basically ignorant ****s being able to nullify any law they disagree with.

I do, %99 of the time it'll be a stupid and/or immoral law they nullify.

Granted, in some cases, it might turn out well, but it seems to me that nullification should be based on a very strict Constitution limiting federal power, and a judiciary committed to upholding those limitations.

Problem is we dont get a judiciary that'll stand up to the Feds because its the Feds who create the judiciary... That leaves us and our juries to ultimately defend our liberty against invalid encroachments.

I think that prohibiting attorneys for arguing for nullification is probably proper, if we are committed to rule of law.

The rule of law includes our inspection of those laws when someone's liberty and property are on the line in court.

The classic counter argument would be juries nullifying the conviction of murderers who murder acceptable people, such as Southern whited tried for murdering Black people or Westerners tried for murdering Wobblies. Truth is, though, all aspects of the criminal justice system can be abused. That isn't a reason to abolish it. Using the same standard we'd have to abolish everything that can be abused.

Well, that wasn't really jury nullification but juror intimidation via systemic racism.

[chequita guevara]

In a world of abundance, taking up extra resources isn't going to be as much of a problem.

Besides, enjoying one's self is part of the fundamental experience of being human.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In a world of abundance, taking up extra resources isn't going to be as much of a problem.

Health care certainly isn't in abundance. Even in countries like Cuba it's in much shorter supply than the demand. In fact, as medical technology increases more and more demand for it increases. Health care may never be in abundance.

Besides, enjoying one's self is part of the fundamental experience of being human.

That's why all people should have access to enjoyable experiences. But you have to consider the bigger picture when you are deciding what those experiences will be.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Kidicious

I'm not against giving people treatment for their sicknesses, but when they make themselves sick by their behavior that's unfair because they take up resources from other people.

Then what about fat people... those that over eat.
They make themselves sick by the behaviour as well.

And no, I'm not saying that fat people are exactly like drug users... but in both cases, people are intentionally doing harm to themselves, and and the healthcare system has to deal with both classes.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ming


Then what about fat people... those that over eat.
They make themselves sick by the behaviour as well.

And no, I'm not saying that fat people are exactly like drug users... but in both cases, people are intentionally doing harm to themselves, and and the healthcare system has to deal with both classes.

Yes, that's right. Fat people are allowed to eat a whole bucket of KFC for example. In fact, often they get someone else to go get it for them because they are too fat to do it themselves. In a future society are drugs going to be like this? Will people be able to take so many drugs that are produced by society and then use up all our health care resources with their sicknesses? I hope not.

[Ben Kenobi]

And no, I'm not saying that fat people are exactly like drug users... but in both cases, people are intentionally doing harm to themselves, and and the healthcare system has to deal with both classes.

True, but any substance when used to excess can kill you, even water.

I think the state has a legitimate argument to regulate the buying and selling of substances, particularly those when used in small amounts are very likely to be harmful.

Granted you cannot and should not prevent people from harming themselves if they choose to do so, but to say that the state shouldn't have any regulation over their distribution is an entirely different argument. What about hazardous chemicals? Should people be free to buy whatever they desire, even if they have no intent to harm others?

What about things like cough syrup which is an essential ingredient for crystal meth labs? Should the state have concerns over those who choose to buy it by the case?

[Ben Kenobi]

Will people be able to take so many drugs that are produced by society and then use up all our health care resources with their sicknesses? I hope not.

Good point. If people are free to harm themselves, then they should not expect others to cover their health care bills for them. The system up here is terrible, and what you are saying here is the precise result of the system.

Legislation and restrictions on people's freedoms are using just this argument, that unless we stop people from hurting themselves they will use up scarce resources in the system. That to me is a sign that we live in an unfree society.

People should be able to choose to live however they want and to live with the consequences of that life.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Good point. If people are free to harm themselves, then they should not expect others to cover their health care bills for them.

Yes, and I think in a communist system health care should be free, so allowing people to purposefully use more health care than others would be unfair.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Then why have se seen no examples of that where they came to power?

Allende was voted into power in Chile, but Pinochet overthrew him and killed him in a military coup.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by TheStinger
BTW is jury selection common in all US states or just some

In all criminal cases and in almost all civil cases. Traffic infractions, small claims cases and cases in equity are tried to a judge.