Right on.
Oh, absolutely. Because one jury believed a prosecutor hadn’t proved a case beyond a reasonable doubt, we should replace trial by jury with trial by Ben Shapiro, the Philosopher-King. That’ll assure justice for all.
Between ubama telling us what is and isn’t Constitutional and all these folks that know this case better than the jury that actually heard the evidence, we ought to just do away with the judicial system altogether. Think of the money we could save.
Oh, absolutely. Because one jury believed a prosecutor hadn’t proved a case beyond a reasonable doubt, we should replace trial by jury with trial by Ben Shapiro, the Philosopher-King. That’ll assure justice for all.I love it when the first response-post of the thread is also the best post of the thread. Good work, Tax-chick.
True.
Can you imagine taking away trial by jury and giving that power to the government?
Right on! and while we are at it why have a trial? It is time to get a real justice system unencumbered by stupid old rules made up 300 years ago by White Rich Slave Owners. Just look at this mess. Think of all the tax money that could be saved. Hell we could take Yankee Stadium and put that witch in there on live tv. Then we could have an internet vote to burn her or let her go. Just think how much fun that would be. Now that would be real Democracy and provide entertainment.
Well said.
> Oh, absolutely. Because one jury believed a prosecutor
> hadn’t proved a case beyond a reasonable doubt, we should
> replace trial by jury with trial by Ben Shapiro, the
> Philosopher-King. That’ll assure justice for all.
Well said, Tax Chick.
Our system ain’t perfect, but it’s WAY better than the alternative.
A better solution is to have a better educated, better informed public, but that won’t happen as long as the Left has anything to say about it.
From the article: "The answer doesn't lie in abolishing the jury system utterly, but in revamping it completely."
Guess you didn't get that far.
Hehe love the dripping sarcasm.
Based on the ‘learned’ courts’ most recent job-lot of rulings including the nonsensical Michigan discrimination case, we are much better off with juries than with judges.
Right on.
and so here we are, over a hundred responses and it has run its course.
Much like the internet in general, aka has been around over two years and things have just shifted into stupid; the coming potential election is already old news; the t-potty is not exciting anymore...let’s just make believe everything is hunky do-re-me again....sooner or later another pseudo-leader will show up and fix everything again, right?
Wrong!
How is it we're now around 120 replies when the best response was the first one? Right on, T-c. I don't think Ben Shapiro, regardless his child prodigy academic prowess and law degree, has the experience in life to understand the importance of the jury system. It may be a flawed system in many ways but it certainly surpasses the alternative.
This was part of the national high school debate question back in the early '70s when I was in HS debate. There have been few substantive changes in the interim and society has not yet collapsed because of it. I doubt the Anthony case will bring any new changes and Shapiro fails to convince me of any need for change.
Be careful there. FReepers are out in full frury over this jury & will attack with a vengeance if you have the nerve to actually think for yourself and go against the flow of “well, it’s obvious she did it” and give the jury credit for looking at the case objectively.
Thanks, tax-chick.
What bothers me about the hulabaloo about this verdict is that people in general are so incredibly ignorant about the legal system, how it works, and what court decisions they should really be paying attention to.
Correct. I guess Ben should have went to the police himself and gave them all that evidence he must have to know, for a fact, his contention is true.