The beezzer's Court. On trial, The 2nd Amendment

reply to post by ColCurious


Thank you. I'm hoping that this "forum" provides some rational validity to the subject.

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

Sorry, I meant that I would be a jury member as I don't know nearly enough to be able to either be for or against it, plus I'm not a US citizen.
I would be more than happy to play an impartial juror though

Im not a US citizen either, In fact its probably better for non US citizens to argue our side, any US citizen who puts forward a good argument is likely to be shot by nuts

As for knowing about it its seems like you do judging from your comments

EDIT: plus I think you may be a bit biased judging from your comments, no defence is gonna want you on the jury LOL

Dear beezzer,

Thanks for accepting me into the ranks. I'm a little confused about the assignments. Who have you got to attack the 2nd Amendment? I might try throwing an idea or two his way. (I like underdogs, who doesn't?)

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by beezzer


So what have you decided Beez?

How many on each side and how many we got so far?

Have we set a date?

reply to post by charles1952


The Second Amendment is under attack.

We are ALL underdogs...........

reply to post by sonnny1

Dear sonny 1,

Of course you are right, and I agree with the need to keep the 2nd Amendment. But, just as a purely intellectual exercise, I think I could make out a case for getting rid of it that would not be completely stupid.

Remember High School debate class where you had to be prepared to argue either side? I think beezzer's experiment is a little like that.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


We did a little trial thing for George Zimmerman and the Martin shooting a few months ago.

If I'm remembering correctly, it took about a week from beginning to end.

One of the jury members dropped off the grid and never voted.
Lets hope that doesn't happen this time.

reply to post by charles1952


Me and Wrabbit have our hands full then.......



Personally, I would hope that those who really would want to do away with the Second Amendment, chime in.

Maybe Piers Morgan?

How will this be impartial? Is the OP the actual judge? Because it's not exactly unbiased if that's the case.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by charles1952

 

Personally, I would hope that those who really would want to do away with the Second Amendment, chime in.

Maybe Piers Morgan?

I don't think even Morgan wants to 'do away with it'.
I think serious questions have been asked about ordinary citizens owning and buying military grade and ultra high power and high capacity weaponary, and rightly so.

I have never understood this mentality.

Originally posted by stargatetravels
How will this be impartial? Is the OP the actual judge? Because it's not exactly unbiased if that's the case.

I believe that for the purpose of this excercise Beezer will do a good job.

We all know his views but I also believe he has integrity and for this purely intellectual excercise think we will do great.

Its just a bit of fun anyway, I doubt very much Obama will be keeping an eye on this thread

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by charles1952

 

Me and Wrabbit have our hands full then.......

Personally, I would hope that those who really would want to do away with the Second Amendment, chime in.

Maybe Piers Morgan?

Ill be arguing that it should be locked away for life for the good of society

Originally posted by stargatetravels



I don't think even Morgan wants to 'do away with it'.
I think serious questions have been asked about ordinary citizens owning and buying military grade and ultra high power and high capacity weaponary, and rightly so.

I have never understood this mentality.

If "we the people" ever have a need to change our Government, and couldn't do it peacefully, do you believe the Military would:

A. Not use Weapons against the people?
B. Use only Non Lethal Weapons?
C. Use Military Weapons with High Capacity Weaponry ?



Stay tuned then. I have a great opening response, that is sure to make many people give up their argument on the subject.........

Peace.

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by beezzer

 

So what have you decided Beez?

How many on each side and how many we got so far?

Have we set a date?

Monday would be a good time to start.
It would give the defense and prosecution time to define their case. It'll also give just a little more time if another juror wants in or if the teams gain another member.

To both sides and jury, a reminder of ATS Courtroom T&C's.

Also, no rhetoric, snide remarks or insults. I will run to a Mod faster than a 14 year old girl at a Beiber Concert!

We are a court to determine the validity of the 2nd Amendment. Motive, means, and oppourtunity are the foundations to any court preceedings.

I will remain impartial and bang the gavel on either side if I see any movement away from the topic.

Prosecution can go first. If objections or redirect from defense occurs, we will work that accordingly.

The jury can ask questions. But specific to the case!!! ONLY!!!

Once prosecution then defense have their say, each side will be allowed a closing statement.

The jury will deliberate and then contact me with a verdict.

Once everyone is ready, I will start a thread with TRIAL in the title.

Sound good to everyone?

Double post, sorry

Originally posted by stargatetravels
How will this be impartial? Is the OP the actual judge? Because it's not exactly unbiased if that's the case.

I won't be deciding, just presiding.

The jury will decide the merits of the case based upon the arguments.

reply to post by beezzer


All sounds good but I worry about the jury being a tad biased towards the pro gun side.

Can either side request jurors be removed from preceedings and replaced?

Is it safe to post names of the jurors we have so a quick post check can be done?
I think it should be OK as I doubt the 2nd will get its friends to hunt them down and imtimidate them

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by beezzer

 

All sounds good but I worry about the jury being a tad biased towards the pro gun side.

Can either side request jurors be removed from preceedings and replaced?

Is it safe to post names of the jurors we have so a quick post check can be done?
I think it should be OK as I doubt the 2nd will get its friends to hunt them down and imtimidate them

We don't have a large pool of juors, but I will allow you one challenge. Same goes for defense.

reply to post by beezzer

We don't have a large pool of juors, but I will allow you one challenge. Same goes for defense.

Understood your honor, thank you

reply to post by beezzer


Yay! I don't work Monday or Tuesday.

I request that I be moved from Jury to prosecution. Although, I am not American, and do not have much knowledge on this, I can definitely find articles, stories, reference material that will not only teach me new things, but, will help my case. Everyone knows that though. If it will help out my argument, I'll find it. I'm like Liam Neeson from Taken. lol
Plus, I really hope to learn from this.