OC on Judge Judy

Not the best publicity. The OCer (the defendant) was kind of foolish and Judge Judy is clearly anti-gun. At one point she asked him how many other morons had a gun on their hip, and he replied that he was the only moron with a gun.

He admitted to having had the "one or two drinks" that every drunk in creation for all time has said he had when challenged. His girlfriend was drunk (he claims and she denies) so he drove her car. They were going to a place where he assured her that they'd need the gun.

For some reason, not clearly explained, something about her not being comfortable with his carrying the gun with "one in the end," he took the gun out of his holster and placed it on the console.

Also unclear is why he later handled the gun. Conflicting stories from the defendant himself indicate that he might have been trying to clear it or that both of them were handling the weapon when it went off, putting a small hole in the dash where the bullet went in and a large hole where it exited before shattering the windshield.

The defendant had already paid for a new windshield so the plaintiff could drive her car, but refused to pay for the dash. Judge Judy thought the plaintiff was an idiot for letting a gun into her car. She ruled that they were both responsible. Since the defendant had paid for the windshield, she gave the plaintiff nothing for the dash.

I'd've made the defendant pay for everything. If one carries a gun, he should handle it responsibly or suffer all consequences for any discharges that result.

I never could understand why anyone watched any of those stupid court shows. "The People's Court" was the begining, and should have been the end. Judge Wapner was never condesending or flamboyant, and the litigants appeared to be legitamite. The court shows they have now are just that, shows (there's like a dozen of them I think). The "judges" seem to be role playing, and most of the litigants appear to be Jerry Springer Show rejects. Even the snippets I've seen advertising these shows are insipid, and do not make them appealing.

That's another thing that irritates me. Why does it seem like half of the commercial segments advertise other shows? Are their ratings so bad they can't sell the commercial time, or are the shows so bad the executives believe advertising them 5 times every half hour will boost their popularity?

PrayingForWar said:

I never could understand why anyone watched any of those stupid court shows. "The People's Court" was the begining, and should have been the end. Judge Wapner was never condesending or flamboyant, and the litigants appeared to be legitamite. The court shows they have now are just that, shows (there's like a dozen of them I think). The "judges" seem to be role playing, and most of the litigants appear to be Jerry Springer Show rejects. Even the snippets I've seen advertising these shows are insipid, and do not make them appealing.

That's another thing that irritates me. Why does it seem like half of the commercial segments advertise other shows? Are their ratings so bad they can't sell the commercial time, or are the shows so bad the executives believe advertising them 5 times every half hour will boost their popularity?

Click to expand...

I liked Wapner. He acted like a judge. Judy acts like some Long Island *******. Roy Brown is another. They dug around in the bottom of the barrel for these two clowns. If I can get Judge Judy or a test pattern, I'll watch the test pattern...and wait for my favorite, "Hoarders" to come on...:>

I can't stand judge judy, good example of a person on a power trip. This just furthers my thoughts on drinking and guns dont mix.

Hollywood, TV and fairytales - all lacking in truth and accuracy.

They have a license to distort and do so with impunity.

scripted entertainment. Does anyone think it intentional that they aired a "case" of carrying and drinking a short time after the New York Times ran an article regarding the number of states that allow one to carry in a bar. The paper also ran an online agree/disagree pole on the practice.

Gunslinger said:

I liked Wapner. He acted like a judge. Judy acts like some Long Island *******. Roy Brown is another. They dug around in the bottom of the barrel for these two clowns. If I can get Judge Judy or a test pattern, I'll watch the test pattern...and wait for my favorite, "Hoarders" to come on...:>

Click to expand...

+1 for Hoarders. I make the wife watch it everytime before we go to walmart.

chewy352 said:

+1 for Hoarders. I make the wife watch it everytime before we go to walmart.

Click to expand...

Now that is a good idea.

I always liked Mills Lane as a 'judge'. I would never go on one of those shows, anyway, because with arbitration you waive your right to a jury trial or a real lawsuit.

Judge Wapner was the best. He really only cared about the legal issues, but was willing to hear the litigants out. Too many of the TV judges don't listen and allow the litigants prattle on about irrelevant stuff that boosts ratings.

However, I'd have no problem with Judge Judy settling a case for me. She may be short with folks, but 99% of the time it is because she sees through the BS. I would trust Judge Joe Brown, too. He may allow too much drama, but he passes moral judgment on that drama. And, he sees through the BS, too.

The rest of them exist solely for the drama. The law doesn't matter much. If they focused on the law, most cases would be settled in five minutes. I think they get a lot of the cases wrong, too. Some of them seem to have an agenda.

Anyway, I was kind of hoping that we'd discuss OC, not the judges. Maybe I should have posted this in the social lounge. :lol:

eye95 said:

Anyway, I was kind of hoping that we'd discuss OC, not the judges. Maybe I should have posted this in the social lounge. :lol:

Click to expand...

Was he OC on the show? If so, no wonder they let him make a fool out of himself. If not, why not? Did he at least go empty holster?

Is he one of us? Have any of you been on Judge Judy lately and didn't tell us?

I hope he wasn't one of us. I'd hate to be around that guy when he was armed. He admitted to the infamous "two drinks" while carrying and handled the weapon in an unsafe way. Also, he deliberately put himself in a situation where he thought he'd need the gun, rather than carrying because the places he went might become a place where you'd need a gun.

At one point the judge asked what kind of gun he carried. He started to reach...I was expecting him to draw a gun...and held up a full-size picture.

I am sure he would not have been allowed to OC in Judge Judy's court. She clearly came off as an anti.

I got the impression that he has been here (or to a similar site), read a little bit, and didn't stick around long enough to have some smarts wear off on him. He knew OC was legal, but did it stupidly.

I can't stand that old hag

I'd put her in her place real quick.

It never ceases to amaze me how many folks walk into her courtroom thinking that precise idea. The end up all looking like fools.

However, the intent of this topic was to discuss the OCer and his actions, not the judges.

eye95 said:

However, the intent of this topic was to discuss the OCer and his actions, not the judges.

Click to expand...

But then the topic is .......?:lol:

That being said, dumb stuff gets said and done by even "smart" folks, so he should just pay for the damage and learn from his mistakes.

eye95 said:

It never ceases to amaze me how many folks walk into her courtroom thinking that precise idea. The end up all looking like fools.

However, the intent of this topic was to discuss the OCer and his actions, not the judges.

Click to expand...

I'm not convinced the show isn't a coreographed insult to our judicial system. Therefore there isn't much to discuss a fictional negligent discharge by an actor in a mock court setting. If it was a real incident, he was almost as stupid for bringing it out on TV.

sudden valley gunner said:

But then the topic is .......?

Click to expand...

OC ("on Judge Judy" is a prepositional phrase providing context).

OC is creeping into the popular culture. That is good. This guy OCed badly. That ain't good. However the theory is that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Some folks, as a result of watching that show, may look up his statement about OC being legal. That would be good.

On edit, in response to the post above: We have no reason to believe that the show is fictional. If you have support for that suggestion, please post it. Otherwise, it is just so much speculation.

eye95 said:

We have no reason to believe that the show is fictional. If you have support for that suggestion, please post it. Otherwise, it is just so much speculation.

Click to expand...

That is the $64,000 question. :lol:

".......the mass deception served as an early warning signal that the medium, and American life, might not always be on the up and up. As if to deny that possibility, Congress promptly made rigging a quiz show a federal crime. A televised exhibition may be fixed; a game show must always be upright."
http://www.museum.tv/eotvsection.php?entrycode=quizshowsca

OC in the courtroom?

My question is, was the guy carrying in the courtroom? That would seem like a really stupid idea, even if the "courtroom" isn't legally speaking a courtroom.

I have it via very reliable hearsay that programs like Judge Judy have agents to troll the court databases, and offer to take on cases they think might be interesting. I guess it's some form of binding arbitration, and perhaps they offer some incentive for being on the show, other than the fame of being on Judge Judy. So while it's an absolute mockery of the mockery we call the Justice System, it's as real as any other "reality" show. I guess that's what America has become.

On the OC angle, I guess any publicity is good publicity, and the fact that he's not facing charges for having a gun is positive. This could just have easily happened if he'd been carrying concealed, took his weapon out, and put his weapon down the wrong way. So in that sense it's exposure for people who carry guns, openly or concealed. I'm sure it'll make some people hysterical just thinking about it, but they're not ready to convert yet anyway.

Johnny W said:

My question is, was the guy carrying in the courtroom? That would seem like a really stupid idea, even if the "courtroom" isn't legally speaking a courtroom...

Click to expand...

The judge asked him what he carried. He reached for something. I thought he was going to pull out his gun. He pulled out a picture of his gun.

Oh, BTW, there is a gun in the courtroom. Her bailiff is OCing.