What is your opinion?

[Blackwater_GT]

What is your opinion on the requirement that elected judges be members of the Bar?


The basis of the question is this - Laws are supposed to be written under the "Common Man Theory". If this is so, why is it that we have to have Lawyers interpret the laws and rule on them? If evidence is presented to a jury to make a determination of Guilt or Fault, why are not the members of the jury lawyers? At one point in time anyone could be elected as a judge. Just wondering what insight some of you may have on this topic. What do you think???

 

[lemon]

stick to racing

um, i really dont pay attention to the judge thing, but it sounds like it needs to be redone... :dunno

 

[Blackwater_GT]

Re: RE: What is your opinion?

stick to racing

um, i really dont pay attention to the judge thing, but it sounds like it needs to be redone... :dunno

Thats why it's in Current events and politics.
It might be to deep for some of you all here. Or just not very interesting. :blah :blah

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

yea lemon, this isnt the automotive forum..

i think there is never going to be a perfect society with rules regarding justice and fairness to everybody- nobody is the same...

if commoners can be eleceted a supreme court judge, that is a mistake. it takes a lot of precedent law knowledge and understanding of history and what works and doesnt work as a ruling. a regular citizen will fail our nation as a supreme judge.

 

[Bossman351]

I may be way off or misunderstood but it seems that in order to judge or interpret a law or its meaning you need to have a great understanding of the law itself. How can a common man with no real knowledge of the law do this job? It seems to me that it should be a must to be a member of the bar. :dunno

 

[lemon]

no, i just didnt really understand your views or what you were asking, or whatever...

but, now that others have posted their views, i think i understand what your asking... so heres what i think:

way back when when the pilgrims came here, they learned about corn from the natives here, but they didnt exactly know how the corn grows, they didnt understand why it grows, and they didnt know the laws that which govern the growth of the corn, but they still planted the corn and got more corn...

im not sure how it exactly applies to us today, but there is some lesson in there somewheres... maybe

 

[dt3]

:funnah

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

whatever lemon- they knew how to farm, but corn was a crop they werent familiar with :wtf

and we are discussing our nation's judicial system, not pilgrimage.

in our world today, there are so many fuck shits that can get popularity points and pay people for votes... etc. and get into office that way. it happens . if one of those fuck shits got into our judicial system by common vote, our nation would be screwed. we need appointed justices, not voted in. highly respected politicians need to be able to nominate and approve all justices.

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: What is your opinion?

whatever lemon- they knew how to farm, but corn was a crop they werent familiar with :wtf

and we are discussing our nation's judicial system, not pilgrimage.

in our world today, there are so many fuck shits that can get popularity points and pay people for votes... etc. and get into office that way. it happens . if one of those fuck shits got into our judicial system by common vote, our nation would be screwed. we need appointed justices, not voted in. highly respected politicians need to be able to nominate and approve all justices.

the supreme court justices are nominated by the president and approved by the senate as is all members of the president's cabinet...

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

no shit

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

this is a topic about changing that process to allow people like you to run for justice and be voted in by citizens- not senators...

that is completely unnaceptable

 

[lemon]

Re: RE: What is your opinion?

this is a topic about changing that process to allow people like you to run for justice and be voted in by citizens- not senators...

that is completely unnaceptable

are you insulting me? cuz if you are, ill will run to my room and cry myself to sleep....

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

well- trying to stay on topic here (this is a serious thread)

if judges are not members of the BAR, then any and all judicial decisions could be politically biased towards the party that put them in office. this would impartially predetermine outcomes of cases such as abortion, stem cell, ecological issues... etc...

 

[CareBear3030]

Re: RE: What is your opinion?

well- trying to stay on topic here (this is a serious thread)

if judges are not members of the BAR, then any and all judicial decisions could be politically biased towards the party that put them in office. this would impartially predetermine outcomes of cases such as abortion, stem cell, ecological issues... etc...

Unfortunately, even though they are members of the bar....I believe there is an enourmous amount of impartial predetermined outcomes in all branches of the government.

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

i know that there is, our gov't is definitely currupt, but a lot of it is "hus-hush" and if the avg. citizen found out about cover-ups and stuff, they'd go ballistic! the gov't covers up some cases to protect us (the people) and our nation from rebellion. there are too many stupid, thaughtless people out there to be able to understand the workings of our gov't without getting fired up and pissed off about every thing they think is unfair.

 

[Blackwater_GT]

I am vehemently opposed to all judges being BAR licensed attorneys by nature of appointment. The BAR (ABA, IBA whatever) is nothing other that a monopolistic entity that holds law out to be something that the common man is not capable of understanding without their guidance. To wit I say Crap!!! First off, if a law as written, is so vague or convoluted that it cannot at a glance establish liability that in My opinion is justly void for vagueness. Under the “Common Man Theory” a man of less than average intelligence is supposed to be able to discern for himself the meaning of a law. This is obviously not so anymore. Now we are all presumed to know the whole body of codes as law and ignorance is held as no excuse.

 

[AtlanticBlue99]

ignorance is no excuse! you cant kill people and say, "wait! i didnt know killing was illegal!"

to be a judge, i feel you must be certified and the board in charge of the certification is the BAR

 

[Blackwater_GT]

Re: RE: What is your opinion?

ignorance is no excuse! you cant kill people and say, "wait! i didnt know killing was illegal!"

to be a judge, i feel you must be certified and the board in charge of the certification is the BAR

Why not? Insanity is an excuse presuming that because they he/she was insane they were ignorant of what they were doing.

I'm sure you realize my point is the judicial system is out of balance. Most of the laws on the books were written by lawyers using legal jargon and syntex that most of us couldn't understand. And I dont hate all lawyers and judges. My nephew is a fine lawyer. But to have your life or freedom depend on the wisdom and legal knowledge of someone appointed to you by the court is not fair or equitable. The judicial system should be simple enough that a defendent could manage his or her own trial.

Jurors are no longer able to sit in judgement of a criminal case. All they can do is hearthe facts and make decisons based on facts only. They are not to judge the fairness of the case or even challenge the law that the defendent is charged with. This was not the case years ago, but the Supreme court in there prejudical judgment did away with this part of the jurors responsibility.