Nothing, but it's easier for a government (willing to tackle racism) to assign blame and replace these people than it is
It's also easier for a government (willing to oppress it's people) to replace these people with people who will oppress the population. The jury system is one more check and balance on the power of the state to take away our liberty. I'm thankful that we have it.
Or just watch Sicko, where Michael Moore uses to the weak US health system to prove why he thinks the slightly weaker (but cheaper) Cuban system is superior.
Some years ago it also meant that a jury composed of racist white people could convict a non-white person of a crime without any solid evidence to that conclusion, and based entirely on irrational preconceptions about behaviour being associated with the levels of melanine in one's skin...
And that wouldn't have happened with a racist judge just as easily as it happened with a racist jury? I'd still rather have the jury, if for no other reason than the fact that it's (hopefully) harder to wind up with 12 racists sitting on a jury than one racist sitting on the bench......
Maybe I'd like to be judged by someone appointed by the state who may or may not be competent and whom may or may not have a political agenda to push, not a group of Joe Blows from the street, thank you very much
Fixed that for you.
Sweden is not the US.
Thanks, I wouldn't have known that if you hadn't pointed it out to me.
The Constitution of the United States sets out and limits the powers of government.
And there again is where the liberal reading of the Constitution has failed us. The liberal reading of the Constitution is generally the reading that finds things within it that don't exist -- like the Interstate Commerce Clause giving the Feds the power to regulate someone growing pot for their personal consumption -- a strict constructionalist reading would suggest that the Feds don't have the power to do this.
The fact that a right to privacy isn't explicit in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, cannot be evidence prima facie that a right to privacy does not exist.
Neither is the 14th amendment evidence that a right to privacy does exist. And seeing as how I was referring to the Roe v. Wade ruling I would point to the 10th amendment, which suggests (to this non-lawyer anyway) that the states should have the right to regulate the practice of abortion as the population therein sees fit.
There's no mention of voting your conscience or that the law might be wrong. You are specifically ordered to follow the law in your verdict.
So what? Is the judge sitting in the jury deliberations to make sure that you follow his instructions? Are you going to be punished if you find the defendant not-guilty even though a strict reading of the judges instructions would have suggested a guilty verdict?
We aren't sheep you know. We are citizens. Within that jury room 12 citizens hold all the cards and all the power. It's not perfect but it beats the hell out of the alternatives. The state is denied the power to take away your life, liberty or property unless it gets the permission to do so from your fellow citizens. Personally I think that's way better than just needing the permission of some judge.
Yes, I served in Jury duty.
I've never had the honor. I have been judged by a grand jury of my peers though. In spite of all the rhetoric you hear about how a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich they listened to my side of the story and refused to allow the prosecution against me to proceed. I'm thankful every day I wake up that we have the jury system in this country.
Who said anything about American law? You have the right to a trial by jury in Canada, the UK and Australia the last time I checked.
"Jury trial" is no "right" to "not have" if the judicial system is different.
Your rights don't come from the judicial system that you happen to live under. They are inalienable rights that all human beings have (or should have). Personally I have a major problem with a legal system that can deprive me of my liberty without the consent of the community. One more reason to be happy I was born in the United States I suppose.
though, that jurors here have it firmly drilled into their heads that they must select guilty/not guilty based on the letter of the law â" which is patently false
And anybody who has ever watched Boston Legal/The Practice/or any one of the 50 Law & Order shows knows that isn't the case. People might not know what jury nullification is called but most are familiar with the concept even if they don't realize it. If you could place yourself in the defendants shoes and would have done the same thing that he did would you honestly vote to convict him?
although I hear that mentioning this fact is a quick way to get passed over in the juror selection process.
Probably, which is why I wouldn't mention it unless they asked. You can't lie to them during jury selection but you don't have to volunteer any extra information either.
What makes you think that it started or ended with Bush? Conservatives have been bitching about activist judges ever since SCOTUS found a non-existent right to privacy and said that it gives you the right to kill your unborn fetus/child/what-have-you.
Mind you, I don't think a right to privacy is a bad concept, I just think we should actually amend it into the Constitution and not decree that it exists.....
And as the Swedes like to mention over and over, this is not the US.
Really? I thought they were the 51st state or something. Or maybe that's why my question was phrased as "do you not have the right to a jury trial in Sweden"? Thanks for the geography lesson though.
Not using a jury means, mostly, that you don't get the drama/rhetoric content from a US trial
It also means that the state can deprive you of your liberty without the necessity of convincing your fellow citizens why that is a good idea. I much prefer the concept of the jury system.
Why surprisingly? This happened in a court room. That kind of behavior in the court room will just upset the judge who will think you are a nutcase, and gets the case decided against you
Isn't this a criminal case? Do you not have the right to a jury trial in Sweden?
he or she would apply the law as it is to judge.
Unless he's a liberal, then he'll invent some new rights and say the Constitution "evolved";)
Greed allocates scarce resources, and it can do a decent job of it. Thrift doesn't produce anything useful.
I don't understand that. Thrift implies savings. Unless your method of saving is the mattress then it stands to reason that your thrift results in increased investment somewhere. Your savings account gives the bank access to cheap capital that can be lent out or invested. Bonds give access to capital to corporations that need it to meet payroll or expand.
My front yard has about 16" of snow right now and if that snowplow covers my mailbox again on purpose I might beat the plow driver with a shovel.
What you haven't done that yet? You aren't a true resident of a cold climate until you've broken at least two snow shovels over the head of the plow driver;) I swear that sadistic son of a bitch waits about a quarter mile from my house for me to finish shoveling out the driveway before he plows our street.......
Let me quote from one of those articles you linked:
The Paulson Ponzi Plunder Plan is the first installment of their final attempt to bankrupt the sheople, who they hope to beat into submission by hyper-inflating and Weimarizing them with bailout after bailout, ad nauseam, knowing full well that these bailouts are futile and useless. The Illuminati will now attempt to force the poor, hapless sheople into a fascist police state as the next giant step toward the creation of a New World Disorder called Novus Ordo Seclorum (a New Order of the Ages), as set forth on the back of every dollar bill under the all-seeing eye overlooking the unfinished pyramid, both symbols of the new age, the occult and the ancient mystery religions. What else would you expect from the satanic trillionaires who hope to become the new lords of the universe. Nice try fellas, but we suspect that God, the current and eternal Lord of the Universe, has other plans. Many of their own henchmen are going to go down in the chaos to follow, but the raving madmen we refer to as the Illuminati will gleefully sacrifice them on the alter of world government.
Now, I like a good dose of paranoia as much as the next guy and I'm well stocked on firearms, canned food and ammo. That said, I think your tinfoil hat needs some adjustment if you are taking anything that article says seriously;)
Huh? In other words, if I have the intellect and the good fortune to make an extra dollar, I shouldn't?
Nice way to selectively quote me. The rest of the quote was "with a little bit of wisdom and an outlook on the future". The rest of the post was lamenting the attitude in our society of only caring about the short term at the expense of the long term. Do you disagree that this is a regrettable trend?
If you have the intellect and good fortune to make an extra dollar then go for it. But if you are making that extra dollar at the expense of two dollars tomorrow then would it not be better not to make that extra dollar? Our entire corporate culture the last few years has tended to place a premium on next quarter instead of next year or the next five years and many of us think that is to our long term detriment.
Make retirement funds for the middle class purely interest bearing again. I'm not even being sarcastic - all my retirement is in inflation based securities
Good for you. All of my retirement is in securities. I've taken a beating the last few months but I've got >35 years before I retire so I'm fairly confident that I'll come out ahead in the end. Let's come back here in 30 years and see which did better -- my securities investments or your cash investments.
I'm in disbelief of the 401k mania over the past 15 years - and scold republicans for wanting to replace S.S. with 401ks.
I'd love to replace my SS with a 401(k). As it stands now I'm going to pay into this system for my whole life only to see the benefits slashed before I retire. I could do way better with that money than Uncle Sam will ever do for me. By all means junk SS and replace it with self-directed investments. People who do their homework will make out just fine -- those that don't, well, that's not my problem.
i guess what i should have said is that greed is not going anywhere
That's the truth. I would just hope that we can temper our greed with a little bit of wisdom and an outlook on the future. I like your phrase, btw, "short-termism". Seems like short-termism has infected our soceity from the citizen buying a big screen TV they can't afford, all the way up to the Federal Government that tried to wage two wars and expand the social safety net on credit.....
Americans like to have our cake and eat it too apparently.
actually, greed is good. it's the great motivator. really, it's the only motivator.
It's a good motivator when it's tempered with wisdom. It's a bad motivator when you blinds you to the long term consequences of your actions. I've been saying for years that it seems like our entire economic system has been tailored to next quarters results at the expense of building/investing for the long term. Who cares if this quarter has record profits if you paid for those record profits with the future viability of your enterprise?
Slashdot Mirror
Tiberius: Look at those women, my...god, I'll...need a...wingman. Red Shirt, accompany my away team.
What makes you think Denny Crane or James T. Kirk need a wingman to pick up chicks? ;)
I'd pilot my shuttle into her delta quadrant any day.
Until she opens her mouth. You'd think with 24th century medical technology they could cure smokers voice.....
Nothing, but it's easier for a government (willing to tackle racism) to assign blame and replace these people than it is
It's also easier for a government (willing to oppress it's people) to replace these people with people who will oppress the population. The jury system is one more check and balance on the power of the state to take away our liberty. I'm thankful that we have it.
I'd rather have justice carried out by qualified professionals without political agendas.
Let me know when you find some ;)
What makes you think trained people can't be racists?
Or just watch Sicko, where Michael Moore uses to the weak US health system to prove why he thinks the slightly weaker (but cheaper) Cuban system is superior.
Fixed that for you.
Ah, I knew you were in my friends list for a reason..... well said sir!
Some years ago it also meant that a jury composed of racist white people could convict a non-white person of a crime without any solid evidence to that conclusion, and based entirely on irrational preconceptions about behaviour being associated with the levels of melanine in one's skin...
And that wouldn't have happened with a racist judge just as easily as it happened with a racist jury? I'd still rather have the jury, if for no other reason than the fact that it's (hopefully) harder to wind up with 12 racists sitting on a jury than one racist sitting on the bench......
Maybe I'd like to be judged by someone appointed by the state who may or may not be competent and whom may or may not have a political agenda to push, not a group of Joe Blows from the street, thank you very much
Fixed that for you.
Sweden is not the US.
Thanks, I wouldn't have known that if you hadn't pointed it out to me.
The Constitution of the United States sets out and limits the powers of government.
And there again is where the liberal reading of the Constitution has failed us. The liberal reading of the Constitution is generally the reading that finds things within it that don't exist -- like the Interstate Commerce Clause giving the Feds the power to regulate someone growing pot for their personal consumption -- a strict constructionalist reading would suggest that the Feds don't have the power to do this.
The fact that a right to privacy isn't explicit in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, cannot be evidence prima facie that a right to privacy does not exist.
Neither is the 14th amendment evidence that a right to privacy does exist. And seeing as how I was referring to the Roe v. Wade ruling I would point to the 10th amendment, which suggests (to this non-lawyer anyway) that the states should have the right to regulate the practice of abortion as the population therein sees fit.
There's no mention of voting your conscience or that the law might be wrong. You are specifically ordered to follow the law in your verdict.
So what? Is the judge sitting in the jury deliberations to make sure that you follow his instructions? Are you going to be punished if you find the defendant not-guilty even though a strict reading of the judges instructions would have suggested a guilty verdict?
We aren't sheep you know. We are citizens. Within that jury room 12 citizens hold all the cards and all the power. It's not perfect but it beats the hell out of the alternatives. The state is denied the power to take away your life, liberty or property unless it gets the permission to do so from your fellow citizens. Personally I think that's way better than just needing the permission of some judge.
Yes, I served in Jury duty.
I've never had the honor. I have been judged by a grand jury of my peers though. In spite of all the rhetoric you hear about how a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich they listened to my side of the story and refused to allow the prosecution against me to proceed. I'm thankful every day I wake up that we have the jury system in this country.
without applying American law and preconceptions?
Who said anything about American law? You have the right to a trial by jury in Canada, the UK and Australia the last time I checked.
"Jury trial" is no "right" to "not have" if the judicial system is different.
Your rights don't come from the judicial system that you happen to live under. They are inalienable rights that all human beings have (or should have). Personally I have a major problem with a legal system that can deprive me of my liberty without the consent of the community. One more reason to be happy I was born in the United States I suppose.
though, that jurors here have it firmly drilled into their heads that they must select guilty/not guilty based on the letter of the law â" which is patently false
And anybody who has ever watched Boston Legal/The Practice/or any one of the 50 Law & Order shows knows that isn't the case. People might not know what jury nullification is called but most are familiar with the concept even if they don't realize it. If you could place yourself in the defendants shoes and would have done the same thing that he did would you honestly vote to convict him?
although I hear that mentioning this fact is a quick way to get passed over in the juror selection process.
Probably, which is why I wouldn't mention it unless they asked. You can't lie to them during jury selection but you don't have to volunteer any extra information either.
What makes you think that it started or ended with Bush? Conservatives have been bitching about activist judges ever since SCOTUS found a non-existent right to privacy and said that it gives you the right to kill your unborn fetus/child/what-have-you.
Mind you, I don't think a right to privacy is a bad concept, I just think we should actually amend it into the Constitution and not decree that it exists.....
And as the Swedes like to mention over and over, this is not the US.
Really? I thought they were the 51st state or something. Or maybe that's why my question was phrased as "do you not have the right to a jury trial in Sweden"? Thanks for the geography lesson though.
Not using a jury means, mostly, that you don't get the drama/rhetoric content from a US trial
It also means that the state can deprive you of your liberty without the necessity of convincing your fellow citizens why that is a good idea. I much prefer the concept of the jury system.
Why surprisingly? This happened in a court room. That kind of behavior in the court room will just upset the judge who will think you are a nutcase, and gets the case decided against you
Isn't this a criminal case? Do you not have the right to a jury trial in Sweden?
he or she would apply the law as it is to judge.
Unless he's a liberal, then he'll invent some new rights and say the Constitution "evolved" ;)
Hmm say, out of curiosity, have you ever found the pot of gold?
I did, but the damn leprechaun advised me to invest it all into a diversified portfolio of AIG, Lehman Brothers, Circuit City and General Motors :(
Greed allocates scarce resources, and it can do a decent job of it. Thrift doesn't produce anything useful.
I don't understand that. Thrift implies savings. Unless your method of saving is the mattress then it stands to reason that your thrift results in increased investment somewhere. Your savings account gives the bank access to cheap capital that can be lent out or invested. Bonds give access to capital to corporations that need it to meet payroll or expand.
What's wrong with thrift?
My front yard has about 16" of snow right now and if that snowplow covers my mailbox again on purpose I might beat the plow driver with a shovel.
What you haven't done that yet? You aren't a true resident of a cold climate until you've broken at least two snow shovels over the head of the plow driver ;) I swear that sadistic son of a bitch waits about a quarter mile from my house for me to finish shoveling out the driveway before he plows our street.......
Let me quote from one of those articles you linked:
The Paulson Ponzi Plunder Plan is the first installment of their final attempt to bankrupt the sheople, who they hope to beat into submission by hyper-inflating and Weimarizing them with bailout after bailout, ad nauseam, knowing full well that these bailouts are futile and useless. The Illuminati will now attempt to force the poor, hapless sheople into a fascist police state as the next giant step toward the creation of a New World Disorder called Novus Ordo Seclorum (a New Order of the Ages), as set forth on the back of every dollar bill under the all-seeing eye overlooking the unfinished pyramid, both symbols of the new age, the occult and the ancient mystery religions. What else would you expect from the satanic trillionaires who hope to become the new lords of the universe. Nice try fellas, but we suspect that God, the current and eternal Lord of the Universe, has other plans. Many of their own henchmen are going to go down in the chaos to follow, but the raving madmen we refer to as the Illuminati will gleefully sacrifice them on the alter of world government.
Now, I like a good dose of paranoia as much as the next guy and I'm well stocked on firearms, canned food and ammo. That said, I think your tinfoil hat needs some adjustment if you are taking anything that article says seriously ;)
Huh? In other words, if I have the intellect and the good fortune to make an extra dollar, I shouldn't?
Nice way to selectively quote me. The rest of the quote was "with a little bit of wisdom and an outlook on the future". The rest of the post was lamenting the attitude in our society of only caring about the short term at the expense of the long term. Do you disagree that this is a regrettable trend?
If you have the intellect and good fortune to make an extra dollar then go for it. But if you are making that extra dollar at the expense of two dollars tomorrow then would it not be better not to make that extra dollar? Our entire corporate culture the last few years has tended to place a premium on next quarter instead of next year or the next five years and many of us think that is to our long term detriment.
Make retirement funds for the middle class purely interest bearing again. I'm not even being sarcastic - all my retirement is in inflation based securities
Good for you. All of my retirement is in securities. I've taken a beating the last few months but I've got >35 years before I retire so I'm fairly confident that I'll come out ahead in the end. Let's come back here in 30 years and see which did better -- my securities investments or your cash investments.
I'm in disbelief of the 401k mania over the past 15 years - and scold republicans for wanting to replace S.S. with 401ks.
I'd love to replace my SS with a 401(k). As it stands now I'm going to pay into this system for my whole life only to see the benefits slashed before I retire. I could do way better with that money than Uncle Sam will ever do for me. By all means junk SS and replace it with self-directed investments. People who do their homework will make out just fine -- those that don't, well, that's not my problem.
i guess what i should have said is that greed is not going anywhere
That's the truth. I would just hope that we can temper our greed with a little bit of wisdom and an outlook on the future. I like your phrase, btw, "short-termism". Seems like short-termism has infected our soceity from the citizen buying a big screen TV they can't afford, all the way up to the Federal Government that tried to wage two wars and expand the social safety net on credit.....
Americans like to have our cake and eat it too apparently.
actually, greed is good. it's the great motivator. really, it's the only motivator.
It's a good motivator when it's tempered with wisdom. It's a bad motivator when you blinds you to the long term consequences of your actions. I've been saying for years that it seems like our entire economic system has been tailored to next quarters results at the expense of building/investing for the long term. Who cares if this quarter has record profits if you paid for those record profits with the future viability of your enterprise?
God I hope so.....