Jury nullification.
- Thread starter Danzig
- Start date
We don't do things by whether they are "okay" or not. I can't define okay, can you.
If the proper process is followed then something is legal. If a citizen, or other branch of government doesn't think it is, then they can challenge it in court.
Laws don't guarantee morality, justice or whatever other word you want to use. They come as close as possible given the millions and millions of people that enact them through their representatives.
One side emphasizes following a process, pursuing predictable results and ensuring alles ist im Ordnung.
The other side emphasizes the inherently inconsistent exercise of conscience in the pursuit of justice.
The points of view in this discussion are so fundamentally different that they will never be reconciled.
I also want to challenge the NFA, because it bans machine guns. I've read the Miller decision, and they said a shotgun wasn't a military weapon, or if it was, they didn't notice it, so it wasn't protected, since the 2nd amendment was intended to assure that we could appear "bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."
If our current court hasn't noticed that machine guns are the weapons our soldiers carry, I'd try to do a better job than Miller did of surviving and showing up to explain that fact to them, assuming I have to get arrested to gain standing on that one.
Is there some way to challenge that one without getting arrested?
Its situational. Some cases don't require you to break the law to have standing. Others may. If you can demonstrate that you are personally affected, or that you face an immediate fear of prosecution then you're in. Whatever the particular facts of your life that fit that only you know.
Ok..let's play Stage 2's game. Tell us oh wise Stage 2, How do I, a lowly Staff Sergeant in the United States Army, get the National Firearms Act of 1934 repealed using only legal methods. Please, walk us through it, step by step. Keep in mind that I only make about $4K a month and I have a family do support. So I don't have a lot in the way of financial resources to battle the issue in court.
How do I do this? Sasquatch, Deadin, Wildalaska, please feel free to help him tell me how this could effectively be done.
How do I do this? Sasquatch, Deadin, Wildalaska, please feel free to help him tell me how this could effectively be done.
Well, first you find a lawyer that will do it pro bono and find an organization that will fund it. Then file a suit against the government. Or start your own organization and solicit funds. If there is such a large percentage of the population that feel as you do, it shouldn't be difficult to raise the money. If there isn't a public mandate that will allow this, I guess you will fall into the category of a "Special Interest Group" (The very thing that has been reviled as "Rule by minority" in earlier posts.)
I never said it could be done on the cheap.
I never said it could be done on the cheap.
Deadin, so what you are essentially (however unintentionally) saying is that it is virtually impossible for an average citizen to get rid of an bad law, especially one that is as entrenched at the NFA 1934. At least using legally acceptable methods.
If for absolutely no other reason, the financial factor alone makes the endeavor practically pointless.
If for absolutely no other reason, the financial factor alone makes the endeavor practically pointless.
The easy answer is to find a state with like minded folks. Maybe those same guns are legal in that state. Now, get the Attorney General to file on the basis of the state that the Federal law violates the Constitution of the United States. That's pretty much an express ticket to the Supreme Court, the same court that has gutted states rights since FDR's reign of terror.
The other legal method is to get your state senator/congressperson to write a bill repealing the existing bill, pointing out that the bill is useless, creating an unneeded agency, who's day and existence is no longer necessary. That law was originally intended to stop the Kennedy's from doing their whiskey, and scotch running stuff. Now they are legit, and in congress, so, we don't need the law anymore it worked.:barf:
Third choice is to create, and organize a group that will help sponsor an amendment to The Constitution, or State Constitution, that the regulation of machine guns is a state 's right, not the Federal governments, and, hopefully again you will be in Federal court.
Another way being attempted in Wyoming right now is a law passed that the local sheriff is the Supreme Law enforcement agency in that state. The law requires that before any warrant/legal action/etc. takes place in the county of Wyoming, the local sheriff must be informed, able to review, and accept or reject the legal action by the federal government, and be involved in the action to serve said person.
If it's rejected, the first step would be for the Federal Government to file in state court, go through that state's appeals process, and Supreme Court, and, then they could appeal into Federal Court, Supreme Court, much as us lowly regular folk have to proceed.
S
The other legal method is to get your state senator/congressperson to write a bill repealing the existing bill, pointing out that the bill is useless, creating an unneeded agency, who's day and existence is no longer necessary. That law was originally intended to stop the Kennedy's from doing their whiskey, and scotch running stuff. Now they are legit, and in congress, so, we don't need the law anymore it worked.:barf:
Third choice is to create, and organize a group that will help sponsor an amendment to The Constitution, or State Constitution, that the regulation of machine guns is a state 's right, not the Federal governments, and, hopefully again you will be in Federal court.
Another way being attempted in Wyoming right now is a law passed that the local sheriff is the Supreme Law enforcement agency in that state. The law requires that before any warrant/legal action/etc. takes place in the county of Wyoming, the local sheriff must be informed, able to review, and accept or reject the legal action by the federal government, and be involved in the action to serve said person.
If it's rejected, the first step would be for the Federal Government to file in state court, go through that state's appeals process, and Supreme Court, and, then they could appeal into Federal Court, Supreme Court, much as us lowly regular folk have to proceed.
S
What I'm saying is that it is virtually impossible to get rid of a law that is "bad" in your opinion, but not necessarily "bad" in everybody else’s opinion. If you can muster enough people (in the big picture, not just on a gun board) that care about it, you can get it changed. Just remember that the vast majority of voters probably don't have an opinion and are happy just the way things are. (They're uncomfortable with change.)
You're not going to do it through JN (unless on a massive scale, which I don't see happening) and I don't see it happening through the ballot box either. NFA 34 just doesn't affect enough people that give a rat's ass to make it on a popular vote. Trying to do it through the courts would be extremely expensive and more than likely very frustrating because of what you mentioned, it is entrenched and has been for over 70 years.
So I guess what my final take is, don’t lose sleep over the fact that you have to live in the right place and/or have enough money to do what you want. All of the stuff you seem to want is legal if you meet the above criteria. I know it isn’t “fair”, but neither are a lot of things. It’s not “fair” that I have worked all my life, served my country for twenty years, been a good upstanding citizen, stood jury duty when called, paid my taxes, voted in all the elections, etc. and can’t have that Ferrari I’ve always wanted. I can’t see beating myself bloody trying to do something I have no real control over. I guess I woudn't make a very good revolutionary. Of course you have to look at where I'm coming from. My life is on the downswing and I just don't have the piss, vinegar and zeal for social upheaval that the younger generation seems to have.