My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ Max said:
@ savannahskol said:
@ Max said:
Doesn't EVERY pardon undermine the respect for the rule of law?
Pardons are a healthy Constitutional executive check/balance on the Judiciary.
Take it up with the Founding Fathers.
That was my point... if one pardon undermines the law, they all do. You can't pick and choose.
Agreed. presidential pardons will always bring skepticism. And rightfully so IMO. I would like to think Trump got this one right as Savannah pointed out. Funny how the media never uttered a word about Obama's pardons.
Could have sworn they did, I could go back and look but It really wouldn't matter.
Quote: @Bolstad79 said:
@ greediron said:
@ Max said:
@ savannahskol said:
@ Max said:
Doesn't EVERY pardon undermine the respect for the rule of law?
Pardons are a healthy Constitutional executive check/balance on the Judiciary.
Take it up with the Founding Fathers.
That was my point... if one pardon undermines the law, they all do. You can't pick and choose.
Agreed. presidential pardons will always bring skepticism. And rightfully so IMO. I would like to think Trump got this one right as Savannah pointed out. Funny how the media never uttered a word about Obama's pardons.
Could have sworn they did, I could go back and look but It really wouldn't matter.
Matters to some folk, its their main justification for their actions. I think it part of a victim complex.
Quote: @BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @ BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
The post is about the Arpaio case, he was being punished for disobeying a Judges order. I know you want to get into the merits of Sheriff Joe's actions, but that wasn't the point. He isn't a criminal for his stance on immigration, it's pure and simple contempt of court. My point is we are a country of laws with a good legal system, your moral justifications for breaking those laws are not germane to his innocence or guilt.
Quote: @BigAl99 said:
Matters to some folk, its their main justification for their actions. I think it part of a victim complex.
Not sure what that is alluding to. I am not a fan of presidential pardons, but as they go, this is much less an issue than the out and out malicious criminals pardoned by Obama. That was my point. Yet the media is making this into a huge issue while it largely slept through Obama's pardons.
Quote: @BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @ BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
The post is about the Arpaio case, he was being punished for disobeying a Judges order. I know you want to get into the merits of Sheriff Joe's actions, but that wasn't the point. He isn't a criminal for his stance on immigration, it's pure and simple contempt of court. My point is we are a country of laws with a good legal system, your moral justifications for breaking those laws are not germane to his innocence or guilt.
so according to you the law is not a buffet when it comes to this instance, but in other cases you will have the chicken but skip the pork?
the law is the law you said, why should that statement apply to this case, but not others? or is your moral system better than mine?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @ BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
The post is about the Arpaio case, he was being punished for disobeying a Judges order. I know you want to get into the merits of Sheriff Joe's actions, but that wasn't the point. He isn't a criminal for his stance on immigration, it's pure and simple contempt of court. My point is we are a country of laws with a good legal system, your moral justifications for breaking those laws are not germane to his innocence or guilt.
so according to you the law is not a buffet when it comes to this instance, but in other cases you will have the chicken but skip the pork?
the law is the law you said, why should that statement apply to this case, but not others? or is your moral system better than mine?
What other cases you talking about?
Quote: @BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @ BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
The post is about the Arpaio case, he was being punished for disobeying a Judges order. I know you want to get into the merits of Sheriff Joe's actions, but that wasn't the point. He isn't a criminal for his stance on immigration, it's pure and simple contempt of court. My point is we are a country of laws with a good legal system, your moral justifications for breaking those laws are not germane to his innocence or guilt.
so according to you the law is not a buffet when it comes to this instance, but in other cases you will have the chicken but skip the pork?
the law is the law you said, why should that statement apply to this case, but not others? or is your moral system better than mine?
What other cases you talking about?
any case, all cases, I mentioned people in jail for pot possession and use, why does the law have to rule in the arpaio case, but not others that often get brought up?
your words " the law is not a buffet " well that means you cant pick and choose which laws apply and which can be ignored so why should joe be in jail for not following a judges order, but people in prison for breaking an existing law shouldnt be, or do you think that pot smokers should be imprisoned?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ BigAl99 said:
My position is in this case he had a cease and desist order put on him by the court and was found guilty of blatantly disobeying it. What books? Federal, State or Local, they all have different Jurisdictions and personell for enforcement. @ BigAl99 said:
It was a court order that he willfully and crimanaly disobeyed, the law is not a buffet. If you can't do the time don't do the crime. If you rob a bank to pay child support or your taxes, ends don't justify the means, woe onto you. Unless, of course, you have someone that will put you above the law.
so now its a case by case basis, so if a conservative breaks a law that works for your agenda, they are criminals. got it. where do you stand on all the people incarcerated for pot?
The post is about the Arpaio case, he was being punished for disobeying a Judges order. I know you want to get into the merits of Sheriff Joe's actions, but that wasn't the point. He isn't a criminal for his stance on immigration, it's pure and simple contempt of court. My point is we are a country of laws with a good legal system, your moral justifications for breaking those laws are not germane to his innocence or guilt.
so according to you the law is not a buffet when it comes to this instance, but in other cases you will have the chicken but skip the pork?
the law is the law you said, why should that statement apply to this case, but not others? or is your moral system better than mine?
What other cases you talking about?
any case, all cases, I mentioned people in jail for pot possession and use, why does the law have to rule in the arpaio case, but not others that often get brought up?
your words " the law is not a buffet " well that means you cant pick and choose which laws apply and which can be ignored so why should joe be in jail for not following a judges order, but people in prison for breaking an existing law shouldnt be, or do you think that pot smokers should be imprisoned?
I wont make a binary all inclusive general case for all that is good or evil. Just wanted to set the record straight why and what Arpaio was guilty of. I find it kind of ironic he was pardoned because of ideology rather than merit of his guilt.
|
