Attorney gets caught with Concealed Carry

[stephen426]

Somehow --that statement seems to sum up everything that's wrong with the USA.....
I know it wasn't intended to, but it sure seems to.

IMNSHO - things in this country would be a whole lot better if everyone in a courtroom except the judge was armed...

Sorry to say but... IMNSHO... That was one of the most idiotic statements I have read on TFL. Sure... lets arm the family members of the victims or the gang bangers who are there for "emotional support" of their friend that is on trial. Maybe we should arm opposing parties in civil suits (as if there wasn't enough haterd between them). Lets arm the jury since they need protection from those who might influence their decision. It might be interesting if one of the jurrors was either paid off of sympathetic with the defendant and he was the only one armed. Hell... While we are at it, arm the defendant so that he could defend himself from the victim or the victim's family. I guess the Judge will just have to go with the flow since he will be the only one not armed.

Think before you post assinine comments... :barf: They're just a waste of space.

 

[bclark1]

Trooper, the bar does do some pretty extensive investigation. It's actually sort of similar to DoD clearance, you need to fess up to everything and account for all your time, find a ton of references, etc. However, a lot of the stuff that I feel matters a lot - particularly substance use and abuse - is sort of a joke. Attorneys run a very high rate of dependencies among professionals. There's really no way to prove this, so 3L wakes up from a weekend binge and giggles while checks the "no" box under narcotics.

Honestly though, my experience is extremely limited, but what I've seen is that judges do not like lawyers unless there were preexisting relationships there. And giving breaks to people who are "your boys" is part of all walks of life, including law enforcement.

Bottom line, I know good lawyers too. And lawyers really aren't the problem, although you can argue they're a symptom, because the court system is a reflection of the society from which it grows. But that's not to say the prejudices are undeserved.

 

[zukiphile]

There ought to be a law against lawyers. They are what is wrong with the world today. They do a pretty good job of protecting us against restaurants that do not print ' CAUTION< THIS COFFEE MAY BE HOT!" or LAWNMOWER Manufacturers that do not put " Caution , this lawnmower will cut your hands or feet if you put them under the mower while the motor is running."

gee thanks.

They are also the reason we pay so much for Health insurance, car insurance, homeowners insurance, and the reason there aren't enough doctors around... Because they keep putting them out of business.

I am sure that in the reflection leading up to writing this thoughtful post, you understood that attorneys also defend restaurants, lawnmower manufacturers, insureds and insurance companies and doctors, and conduct all of the prosecution of criminals.

I didnt know lawyers had to pass a "backround check". Ive arrested quite a few in my day for some pretty heinous stuff. Guess what? They are still lawyers.

Being arrested and having had a backgorund check are not mutually exclusive. Being arrested isn't prescisely the same as being convicted, and not even all convictions properly result in disbarment.

And lawyers really aren't the problem, although you can argue they're a symptom, because the court system is a reflection of the society from which it grows. But that's not to say the prejudices are undeserved.

In the civil area, parties often have the lawyer they deserve, one who reflects their morality and general outlook.

 

[Erich]

I'm a lawyer. I used to be a prosecutor but now I do criminal defense. Because of me, (among other things) the law on use of deadly force in a citizen's arrest is better in NM than it used to be. I also do a whole lot of pro bono work teaching the law on self-defense to concealed carry classes.

I'm always amused by doofuses who whine about lawyers being evil. Particularly when something happens to them and they run whining to me to have someone defend their rights.

I guess we can't expect everyone to be smart enough to think it though . . . You folks all have a nice day . . . and call me when you need me!

 

[elkman06]

Hmm, where to start. I guess the Barristers are restless now. You certainly have the right to disagree but calling people names, etc? It's amazing to me(the doofus) that you should have to stoop that low. One might note, I did comment that lawyers were necessary. As to lying for a living, I guess that was a little harsh on my part. I'm not sure how else to describe what a lawyer is doing while representing someone who ultimately is found to be guilty by his peers. Spinning the facts, is a phrase that is used elsewhere, that might be what is being done. I personally will admit to having lied in my life, however, I have not done it to attempt to prosecute someone who is innocent in court nor have I have done it to protect someone who is guilty in court.
I have first hand had lawyers accuse me of bad things in front of a judge(not felonious things) where the judge had been hand picked to be less than sympathetic toward males in divorces. Much of my bias comes from this. Luckily I did have a decent lawyer representing me.
I would ask Erich to give me an honest answer on one question. As a defense attorney, I will assume you are a good one, have you ever gotten someone off who you personally(be honest) felt was guilty of the crime? If so, how did you feel that night when you went home to your wife or child and they asked "What did you do today Daddy?"
I will finish with one comment. Without calling anyone a name, without questioning anyones' IQ, I do not respect the profession. Never have, never will. My right, my opinion. I'm sure some of you will not be able to keep from flaming away because of this reply,,, well have fun. I'm done.
elkman

 

[Blondie]

Elkman,

That is a respectable post, and everyone is entitled to their opinion

My only observation is in regards to how people think defense lawyers get people off.

In reality, judges and juries decide innocence or guilt. Our system is set up so both sides (defense and prosecution) do their best to prove their cases and an impartial trier of fact decides the ultimate issues. The lawyers decide nothing. Again, not a perfect system, but the best in the world.

Blondie

 

[armedtotheteeth]

I cant help hatin lawyers. I was once sued by a guy who hit my truck in a parkin lot. FOr WHIPLASh!! I was in a restaraunt, eating.. ANd this turd backs into my truck and looks around, grabs his neck and stats freakin out. I had like 15 witnesses saying i wasnt even in the truck. I was sued for $30, 000, + COURT COSTS, AND LAWYER FEES. It worked out to about $80,000 with lawyer fees. Yeah, right, It was dismissed as I had 15 witnesses. The other guy had like 2, they where in the back of the car. Other stupid lawyer induced things have happened to me too. I atually have no beef with most lawyers, but , the tards seem to outweigh the good ones. The ambulance chasers, Bankruptcy lawyers, "did your loved one die because of wrongful death ? Call us, we dont care if they where 132 years old, we will sue !" I have seen OBYGYN docs out of business because of lawyers, over and over. The company I work for got sued by the family of a airplane owner that crashed. All we did was a check on one of his radios, This idiot fell asleep and ran into the ground and died. Yet, we paid a zillion dollars to this morons family because they had "good" lawyers.
Yeah I know, off topic, sorry. Yeah lawyers need to get CW licences, they are not above the law.

 

[Alleykat]

That circular statement did not explain any distinction between lawyers, judges, and district attorneys.

In fact, it wasn't a circular statement, just an obviously failed attempt to shed a little factual light to the apparently unenlightenable. Judges aren't ex-lawyers; they're lawyers, as are district attorneys. The distinction is that, in some states, legislatures have decided that judges and district attorneys can carry concealed without a permit, but other lawyers can't. Just don't know how to make it any clearer than that.

I'm just passing along facts; don't propose to second-guess the legislatures.

Oh, good job on picking a username!!

 

[Hal]

Sure... lets arm the family members of the victims or the gang bangers who are there for "emotional support" of their friend that is on trial.

Worked well before....

I believe you may want to do a little research into the racist roots of gun control before launching into an emotional display of ignorance/arrogance.

You might also want to look into exactly what a judge is supposed to do.

Have a nice life...

 

[Socrates]

Gun control is mainly a class warfare issue. I, having a Juris Doctrate degree, was fairly amazed how people who swear to uphold the Constitution could pass the bar, and then act against their sworn oath. This, however, can be said of our entire Congress, and, they are the people that pass all these laws.

Now, PEOPLE vote these folks into office. PERIOD. Any blame should be focused at the feet of the voters, who, OH MY GOD! THAT'S ME, YOU, AND US, THE AMERICAN VOTERS... WHAT A SHOCK! We are actually responsible for what happens to us

 

[zukiphile]

Judging the entire legal system by how much you didn't care for your own divorce case is a bit like judging the medical profession by how much you enjoyed having your tooth pulled by a dentist.

I cant help hatin lawyers. I was once sued by a guy who hit my truck in a parkin lot. FOr WHIPLASh!! I was in a restaraunt, eating.. ANd this turd backs into my truck and looks around, grabs his neck and stats freakin out. I had like 15 witnesses saying i wasnt even in the truck. I was sued for $30, 000, + COURT COSTS, AND LAWYER FEES. It worked out to about $80,000 with lawyer fees. Yeah, right, It was dismissed as I had 15 witnesses.

So your complaint is that you were sued, and won without even having to go to trial? This is not much of an indictment of the system.

Endure a traffic stop in Mexico or watch Midnight Express or read Solzhenitsyn, and let us know how unjust and unbearable the US system is.

 

[Conn. Trooper]

I think some of this negativity comes from the frivilous lawsuits that are pursued by some in the legal field. I would like to think that if I was a lawyer, and I had a potential client with an absolute bulls**t claim in my office, I would tell them they had a bulls**t claim and not go forward with it. I would not take their money and move forward with it. I think everyone has heard of outrageous and laughable lawsuits over and over again and are disgusted with the legal system as a whole. Although, judges and the courts are jus as guilty. They allow some of these to move forward as well.

I do believe everyone is entitled to the best defense possible. However, I question the ethics and judgement of anyone who knowingly attempts to free the worst society has to offer , and there are some people that are without a doubt in the world guilty, and have been unleashed back on society because of lawyers. Tough spot to be in, someone has to do it, just not going to be me.

 

[zukiphile]

I think some of this negativity comes from the frivilous lawsuits that are pursued by some in the legal field.

That is undoubtedly true. There is also a popular perception that frivolous lawsuits and outrageous judgments are indicative of the general state of the system, when in fact they are the rare exception.

I would like to think that if I was a lawyer, and I had a potential client with an absolute bulls**t claim in my office, I would tell them they had a bulls**t claim and not go forward with it.

Almost all of them do exactly that.

I think everyone has heard of outrageous and laughable lawsuits over and over again and are disgusted with the legal system as a whole. Although, judges and the courts are jus as guilty. They allow some of these to move forward as well.

Some of those laughable lawsuits are only laughable if crucial information is left out of the retelling of the facts of the case. The Mcdonalds hot coffee case is a good example.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

I do believe everyone is entitled to the best defense possible. However, I question the ethics and judgement of anyone who knowingly attempts to free the worst society has to offer , and there are some people that are without a doubt in the world guilty, and have been unleashed back on society because of lawyers.

Criminal defense lawyers don't free anyone. It is always the state's burden to prove its case, and the state doesn't always carry its burden. In every case, just as you note, there is an arresting officer, prosecutor and judge, and often a jury, who were every bit as much involved in freeing a defendant as was the defense counsel.

Tough spot to be in, someone has to do it, just not going to be me.

If you want to know tough, try defending someone you know to be innocent. It is a great responsibility to keep an innocent man from being caged.