Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 11:52:59 GMT -5
About half the counties in Arkansas are dry also (no alcohol sales allowed) Marion county in north Arkansas just went wet recently. It was big news locally, with a lot of caterwauling from church groups and others. nothing learned from Prohibition, i guess? You can drink, just not sell. The war on liberty continues in regards to alcohol over here. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712 
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 29, 2014 14:52:51 GMT -5
nothing learned from Prohibition, i guess? You can drink, just not sell. The war on liberty continues in regards to alcohol over here. that battle has been over for decades in CA. and yet YOU laugh at US? amusing. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Aug 29, 2014 14:54:14 GMT -5
really? what does it explain for you? lone is from here, too. what does it explain about her? It explains that I'm just funnin here. Feel free to make all the Arkansas jokes you want. I ridicule myself way more than you will.  i don't know enough about Arkansas to joke about it, other than that there is a big Baldor Motor factory in Ft Smith. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 14:57:06 GMT -5
You can drink, just not sell. The war on liberty continues in regards to alcohol over here. that battle has been over for decades in CA. and yet YOU laugh at US? amusing. Average education levels here are so low that it's like your living 50 years in the past when you come here. Doesn't stop the laughing though. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2014 12:06:06 GMT -5
I can. California, land of the fruits and nuts.  if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Well? It's been a couple of days now. Any recent moves that are just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary that matches the OP of this thread. You promised. The attempted deflection to dumb "laws" isn't what you posted. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 2, 2014 12:25:23 GMT -5
if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Well? It's been a couple of days now. Any recent moves that are just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary that matches the OP of this thread. You promised. The attempted deflection to dumb "laws" isn't what you posted. i already pointed it out to you. go back and read....CAREFULLY, this time.  edit/hint: it was posted by another poster.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2014 12:38:17 GMT -5
if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Well? It's been a couple of days now. Any recent moves that are just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary that matches the OP of this thread. You promised. The attempted deflection to dumb "laws" isn't what you posted. Still waiting for something equally as dumb from the judiciary of Arkansas as shown in the OP from California. You promised. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 2, 2014 23:25:05 GMT -5
Well? It's been a couple of days now. Any recent moves that are just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary that matches the OP of this thread. You promised. The attempted deflection to dumb "laws" isn't what you posted. Still waiting for something equally as dumb from the judiciary of Arkansas as shown in the OP from California. You promised. please demonstrate that you have better reading abilities than the average Arkansasian. |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 2, 2014 23:41:24 GMT -5
The California Supreme Court has ruled that the silence of suspects can be used against them.
"It's a very dangerous ruling," Zilversmit said. "If you say anything to the police, that can be used against you. Now, if you don't say anything before you are warned of your rights, that too can be used against you."
The state Supreme Court in a 4-3 ruling said Tom needed to explicitly assert his right to remain silent — before he was read his Miranda rights — for the silence to be inadmissible in court.
Justice Goodwin Liu dissented.
"The court today holds, against common sense expectations, that remaining silent after being placed under arrest is not enough to exercise one's right to remain silent," Liu wrote.
link
I can't even find words for this.... 
I can. California, land of the fruits and nuts.
You do realize that those nuts you are talking about are the right-wing-nuts, don't you? From the article:
So it looks like all we need to do to preserve and safeguard individual liberties is to get all those conservatives off the bench, right?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 2, 2014 23:53:11 GMT -5
great catch, tallguy! i had assumed this was a liberal court like the 9th circuit. bad assumption. now that i know it is NOT, i am pretty sure this thing will get overturned. unlike the laws in post 10. |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 2, 2014 23:59:37 GMT -5
To be honest, I caught it the first time I read it before creating the thread. Surprised it took this long. Did nobody else read through the link? Or at least did no LIBERAL read through the link? A conservative wouldn't have brought it up. Understandably. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:07:11 GMT -5
To be honest, I caught it the first time I read it before creating the thread. Surprised it took this long. Did nobody else read through the link? Or at least did no LIBERAL read through the link? A conservative wouldn't have brought it up. Understandably. honestly? no. i figured that CA had earned ridicule on this one, and indeed it has. but it never occurred to me that the ridicule should be directed against my states conservatives in this case. delicious! |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 3, 2014 0:11:18 GMT -5
And again to be honest, I have no idea what the actual makeup of the court is or how they voted. I am accepting as fact the opinion of the author and the lawyer quoted. Do you happen to know?
(I do know it was a 4-3 vote but not whether conservatives voted in favor or whether they are in fact a majority.) |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:12:54 GMT -5
well, you got me going now. i will find out....brb! |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 3, 2014 0:15:38 GMT -5
(Damn, I sure hope it turns out to be true....) |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:18:06 GMT -5
(Damn, I sure hope it turns out to be true....) it is true. five of the seven justices are GOP appointees. since the verdict was 4:3, it sounds entirely possible that with the new Brown appointee, it will be overturned in January. edit: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_CaliforniaFive current justices were appointed by Republicans (Cantil-Sakauye, Baxter, Werdegar, Chin, and Corrigan)
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 3, 2014 0:20:33 GMT -5
On the bright side, it seems there is one GOP appointee who is NOT a nut. That's something.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:22:28 GMT -5
On the bright side, it seems there is one GOP appointee who is NOT a nut. That's something. Arnie was a pretty moderate Republican. i am betting it is one of his. now, to go check the ruling and see! here are signators on the majority opinion: 34 DISPOSITION The judgment of the Court of Appeal is reversed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. BAXTER, J.
WE CONCUR:
CANTIL
-
SAKAUYE, C.
J.
CHIN, J.
CORRIGAN, J.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:33:24 GMT -5
so, yes, four out of the five Republican appointees (including both of Schwartzaneggers) voted in the majority on this decision. this was a conservative verdict, not a liberal loopy one. hahaha. oh well. don't worry. liberals will fix it. (i'll be damned.) |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 0:41:53 GMT -5
On the bright side, it seems there is one GOP appointee who is NOT a nut. That's something. it was Werdegar. she was appointed by Wilson. |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 3, 2014 0:51:10 GMT -5
so, yes, four out of the five Republican appointees (including both of Schwartzaneggers) voted in the majority on this decision. this was a conservative verdict, not a liberal loopy one. hahaha. oh well. don't worry. liberals will fix it. (i'll be damned.)
Glad I could be of service to you, sir.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 8:52:40 GMT -5
I can. California, land of the fruits and nuts.
You do realize that those nuts you are talking about are the right-wing-nuts, don't you? From the article:
So it looks like all we need to do to preserve and safeguard individual liberties is to get all those conservatives off the bench, right?
California has a conservative leaning supreme court? Wow. You need to get those uneducated, clinging to guns and religion, conservatives out of there. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 9:10:47 GMT -5
I can. California, land of the fruits and nuts. if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Here's your post (#7) I still haven't seen you find anything just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary as in the OP. You promised. (Hint; laws passed by the legislature aren't the same as the interpretive decisions made by the judiciary) |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 10:35:11 GMT -5
You do realize that those nuts you are talking about are the right-wing-nuts, don't you? From the article:
So it looks like all we need to do to preserve and safeguard individual liberties is to get all those conservatives off the bench, right?
California has a conservative leaning supreme court? Wow. You need to get those uneducated, clinging to guns and religion, conservatives out of there. unless you like the ruling in the OP, you are only half joking. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 3, 2014 10:36:10 GMT -5
if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Here's your post (#7) I still haven't seen you find anything just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary as in the OP. You promised. (Hint; laws passed by the legislature aren't the same as the interpretive decisions made by the judiciary) i am going to tell you that it has already been posted one more time, and then i am going to stop responding to your posts, mmkay? your "earnest plea" is starting to seem like baiting and harassment to me. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 6:25:59 GMT -5
Here's your post (#7) I still haven't seen you find anything just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary as in the OP. You promised. (Hint; laws passed by the legislature aren't the same as the interpretive decisions made by the judiciary) i am going to tell you that it has already been posted one more time, and then i am going to stop responding to your posts, mmkay? your "earnest plea" is starting to seem like baiting and harassment to me. That's one way out of it. |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,690
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 5, 2014 9:19:12 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 29, 2024 0:48:57 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2014 11:15:08 GMT -5
I can't see it standing up to the US Supreme Court. A requirement to appear innocent? I suppose it isn't that far fetched if you can be required to purchase health insurance. I think we're starting down a whole new road of government mandate. I remember reading about certain sections of route 66 where you can't be driving on it without a destination. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2014 11:50:14 GMT -5
I can't see it standing up to the US Supreme Court. it won't make it that far. it will be overturned in January, when Brown's new LIBERAL justice is seated.A requirement to appear innocent? I suppose it isn't that far fetched if you can be required to purchase health insurance. I think we're starting down a whole new road of government mandate. I remember reading about certain sections of route 66 where you can't be driving on it without a destination. agreed. conservatives should stop trying to take our constitutional rights away. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,712
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2014 12:15:17 GMT -5
if you tell me what state you live in, i guarantee i can find something just as dumb that your judiciary has done within one day. Here's your post (#7) I still haven't seen you find anything just as dumb from the Arkansas judiciary as in the OP. You promised. (Hint; laws passed by the legislature aren't the same as the interpretive decisions made by the judiciary) hint: post 10 contains actual laws. you can read the full text of them HERE: www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/arkansasgood luck repairing your glass house. please stop throwing stones until you do. |
|
