| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Comments:
<0> it kicks for flooding
<1> you cant have it both ways when it comes to the judiciary, people
<2> but judges are still picked by the governor, and appointed by the legislature...
<1> cappicard: and thats when you weed out the ones you dont want.
<1> right then.
<3> ah
<3> how quickly ? I had maybe 3 lines orso
<4> It seems to me that one side of the political isle wants knee jerk reactionary politician judges that have to run for office so they'll be afraid of handing down unpopular decisions.
<1> you complain when judges disregard the law and rule for what they feel is best for society
<5> 4 lines in like NO time is a guranteed kick. or was it 5?
<2> it was actually 4, oelewapperke
<1> and then you complain right now when they just implement the law as its written.
<6> hello is someone familiar with WI-FI?
<1> letting the school district run in violation of the law would clearly be judicial activism
<5> Zylmak: I find hi-fi much more enjoyable
<3> okay, I'll try to be more careful
<2> every district in the state being shutdown?!
<2> in 105 counties..
<7> TBT, i've managed to piss off more than a few judges in my life...and personally, I think they are moronic (as a whole)
<6> The problem is that my router does not use tha same terms than linux
<1> dogbert2: they're not moronic, they just dont care about you.
<1> They care about the rule of law.
<2> that was what the KSUS did last year...
<2> KSSC
<4> There's another downside to electing judges
<1> the court system should absolutely not be subject to popular opinion
<4> People who aren't even lawyers might run
<4> Who have very little knowledge of the law
<1> thats right.
<7> NDP...having a LAW degree does NOT make one all knowing...trust me
<7> btw, it is possible for a non-lawyer to be a US Supreme Court Justice
<1> dogbert2: having an engineering degree doesnt either, but I wouldnt want someone designing an airplane I was flying in without one.
<1> dogbert2: it's possible but the legislature would be negligent if they confirmed such a person
<7> TBT, and when the courts get the law wrong, or violate the constitution, what then?
<4> dogbert2: Its going to happen regardless.
<4> Courts are run by humans and humans make mistakes.
<1> You appeal.
<4> That doesn't mean you should make the system faulty to try to prevent that.
<7> TBT...and when it's the state's highest court which engages in this ****? (you can't appeal that)
<0> I should probably bike home before it rains again
<3> dogbert2: you can try to appeal to international institutions
<3> like the court of Human Rights in Amsterdam
<3> or the <blahblah> in Geneve
<1> Then you lose.
<0> Geneva Convention
<7> TBT, no, the people of the state LOSE when courts failed to uphold the law and the constitution
<0> and that Human Rights Commission is in The Hague, IIRC
<1> I would argue that in most cases the courts get it right
<1> and the bitching about his defeat got it wrong
<1> s/the/the guy/
<4> oelewapperke: We're talking about US Courts here. International institutions have no authority in the US.
<2> NDPTAL85, e.g. the United Nations
<4> cappicard: lol
<2> politically, that organization is as effective as a fly on a car windshield
<1> you people look at the UN like it's the bogeyman
<4> Its hard to respect an organization that can't seem to get a damn thing right.
<1> thats why he didnt say "the UN" when he said "international organizations"
<4> Oh I wasn't thinking of the UN originally
<3> TenBaseT: actually I just didn't think of them
<4> I was thinking of the Hague
<4> Which also has no authority in the US
<3> although I must say your effectiveness remark is quite on the spot :-p
<5> NDPTAL85: If you buy "cant get things right" mean that they didn't blindly eat the forged WMD evidence, then yes
<1> Anyway, the US legal system isn't perfect but I believe the courts are FAR less corrupt than hte legislatures are
<2> TBT, i don't deny that the UN has not done anything with humanitarian aid.
<2> it's just has very little political power...
<5> TenBaseT: heh
<1> I'm not a big UN fan either right now. the present structure doesnt work.
<1> and I think the reason the courts arent as corrupt as legislatures is very much because there's no corrosive influence peddling
<1> judges dont give a **** about who has money
<3> we accept the authority of the UN, as in the US and most of Europe do, but nobody else does
<1> judges dont give a **** about contribution to their campaign funs
<7> TBT...justice in NV is indeed corrupt
<1> dogbert2: as corrupt as the legislature?
<3> and the UN reacts to that by punishing "the west" with ever more cumbersome treaties, thereby weakening their support
<3> it should collapse soon enough
<7> TBT, absolutely...my former poly sci teacher (now the Dem. candidate for governor here) once said that the most dangerous branch of government is the judiciary, and I happen to agree with her
<4> The executive has an immediate and potent check on the judiciary. They just almost never use it.
<4> The pardon.
<4> Its also an indirect check on the legislature.
<4> If the legislature creates a horrible law, and the courts uphold it then the executive could render it unenforceable with a blanket pardon.
<7> NDP...pardon's only work for people convicted of crimes
<4> I know
<7> and the pardon in NV can't overrule an act of the legislature
<4> But if law enforcement knows the person is just going to be released after conviction they'll be less willing to prosecute
<4> In each state its different
<4> But all laws are acts of the legislature
<7> if you have a conviction, you have already be prosecuted and found guilty (or plead guilty outright) :)
<1> dogbert2: I disagree fundamentally with that idea of the judiciary being the most dangerous.
<4> So the NV pardon would have to be unusually weak to not work
<1> dogbert2: I think the influence of money and electioneering would be very, very corrosive to the judiciary
<7> NDP...the president can pardon ANYONE, but he cannot pardon legislation (NV is founded on the same principle)
<1> Judges would be afraid to render unpopular, but legally correct, rulings
<7> TBT...of course it is...
<4> I didn't say he would pardon legislation.
<1> "If I rule this way, I'll get thrown out of office"
<1> thats just horrible.
<7> TBT, judicial activism is when judges try to legislate from the bench
<4> A blanket pardon if you are confused by what I said would merely mean an automatic pardon for anyone convicted of a particular crime.
<7> and that's very dangerous
<0> I agree with TBT
<1> dogbert2: like when you let a judge allow a school district to operate in direct violation of the law?
<4> So lets say the legislature made it a crime to use Linux.
<4> The president or governor could simply say "Ok, automatic pardon for anyone convicted of running Linux"
<4> Prosecutors don't like to waste time and money so even the arrests and trials for the crime would stop.
<4> In effect it would be rendered unenforceable.
<2> TBT, the KSSC forced *every* USD in Kansas to shutdown last June. Just not a select few...
<8> naah, in the end they throw people in jail without prosecution. Fear & terror :P
<8> that'll show 'm and drive things underground. Damn hippies :P
<2> just because the budget that was p***ed by the lesgislature didnt' give enough money for schools... yet the state itself was in a deficit...
<7> cappicard...if only that **** could happen in NV...I personally get NO benefit from public education at all
<4> Lion-O: That would be against the Federations.....I mean the United State's most sacred principles!
<1> It's not the judges job to rule on the sum body of law, just the challenge brought before it?
<1> why dont you blame the guy who brought the lawsuit asking for the school to be shut down?
<4> Lion-O: http://stargatefan.textamerica.com/?r=5315196
<7> TBT, i'd welcome shutting down public schools in NV :)
<8> hehe
<4> Heheh
<5> oops :P
<1> dogbert2: I know you would. You have no respect for any civic institutions or state-sponsored activities.
<4> Jostein: I love that song
<5> heh
<5> first time Ive heard it
<7> TBT...no, i'm TIRED of the state sticking it's fingers in my hard earned money (what's wrong with that)?
<1> Because you cant be an island anymore, living off the grid in the desert.
<0> especially in LVNV :P
<7> TBT...I have no children, I have personally paid property taxes for an entire generation of school kids (20 years worth) after I graduated from high school)...why should I be required to support the system in question?
<1> you've got to give up a little to make the infrastructure possible
<7> even when I don't benefit from it?
<1> dogbert2: for the same reason I have to support you with medicare, grandpa
<5> dogbert2: if participation in the system was volunteery, the system would fall to its knees in seconds
<7> TBT...I don't collect medicare or SS (i'm 25 years away from being able to do so, and it will be GONE by the time I need to use it)
<1> I dont have a problem with public schools. I think they're a good thing.
<7> Jostein...exactly...public schools didn't exist in the US until about 1925 or so...
<1> I also dont have a problem with medicare.
<1> medicare will only be gone because politicians steal its money
<1> it was designed soundly.
<5> and I like the way things work here, despite paying high taxes
<0> hrm, 11AM, I should probably head out now
<0> see you folks on the flipside
<4> Um
<1> I dont mind taxes, I just wish the rich paid more and the middle cl*** paid less
<4> Doesn't NV have like one of the lowest tax rates in the US?
<4> I remember seeing a documentary on Nevada about how the low tax rate was making it hard to provide services to the homeless and the poor.
<4> Exactly how much lower do you want the taxes to get? Low enough to cause riots?
<7> NDP...pfft...we are taxed to death as well...no state income tax, but sales and property taxes simply bufu you to death
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
#java
#chatzone
+FORMERLY KNOWN AS GREENLAND +
#linux
#gentoo
nailla de safi
chatzone peru
site:www.quotesdb.info rotards
#linux
#AllNiteCafe
|
|