PERZACTLY!the question was not what course of action is best to change a law but would you vote to convict someone under an unjust law if you were on a jury. While not voting to convict an individual in one particular case may not create a change in the law, it may make a huge difference in that individuals life, and that is important. Additionally, the two courses of action are not mutually or morally exclusive so it is not an either or choice.
Well said Mack.
Miller's been held to be constitutional to. Heck, so was slavery once upon a time.I mean lets make the poll realistic.....would you vote to convict a man who is accused of illegally carrying a weapon if the law allegedly violated has been tested and held to be constituional.?
So not necessarily.
Oh, I'm aware of the sorry history of eugenic-speak and its consquences..there and here. That doesn't mean every single German was itching to kill Jews.If you are going to use the Holocaust in your arguments, helps if you have a full understanding of the mentality behind it.
Evidently.Or is my morality different than yours?