Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Thanksgiving message from Joe Biden | Main | We're in the best of hands.... »

College "diversity"

Posted by David Hardy · 4 December 2022 12:12 PM

Some interesting thoughts. I've often encountered that in the past. At the local college of law, I once looked up faculty voting registrations. Out of 30 or so that I found, there was only one Repub, a new hire. And of course if you bring up the Second Amendment, the reaction is echhh...

Haven't been blogging because last week I had a complex case. And in the coming week I'm summoned for jury duty, and won't be able to talk about that until the trial is over. I noticed something amusing, though. Arizona has mandatory, repeat mandatory, retirement for judges at age 70. But jurors must serve up to age 75.

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Old Guy | December 4, 2022 2:12 PM | Reply

They need the warm bodies - retired people often make up the juries because the have the time and many like the idea

BobF | December 5, 2022 12:06 AM | Reply

Well, the judge must think for himself, but individual jurors have all those others to "help" them make their decisions. Everyone knows groupthink has better outcomes than individual thought, eh?
/sarc

Dave D. | December 5, 2022 7:55 AM | Reply

..Well, there’s always the coin flip if confusion muddles the jurist mind. Best done in chambers…alone. Never, NEVER at the bench following a judge saying “ Well, lets just find out ….”.
….The dirty secret is that the judges can and do retire and then come back on contract to work until their Biden age. Double dipping. Keeping their hand in, so to speak. And since the Judgeship positions are finite, that gives another lawyer a chance to grab the ring. And another Governor a chance to pay back a political debt.
…Jurors have no such sinecure. They serve at the whim of the clerk.

FW | December 18, 2022 9:06 AM | Reply

In a proper system, no judge would serve continuously. In my system, like JAG, an attorney would be randomly selected to act a judge and another to act as prosecutor in each case, different persons in each instance. The defense attorney would be chosen by the defendant. There would be no "hired", long serving judges or DAs. Stop the need for notches on their guns to prove they "fight crime", another point I always vote against. I don't want someone who's "tough" on crime. I want someone who will seek justice. And I want folks in there who aren't trying to prove themselves to get reelected. In my state, I always vote against retention of judges just as I vote against incumbents.

Leave a comment