eye95
Well-known member
Let's see if he speaks out against it. He has already used his show to express wonder why folks other than cops would want to carry. He is a former LEO.
Used to be in Ohio you had to ride OC...this was for motorcycles and vehicles...the law was recently changed to allowed CC on motorcycles and in vehicles...the reason you had to OC on a motorcycle or vehicle was for officer "protection"...haha....I love how judges have there own opinions on these television shows...hopefully they go by state laws instead of what they think is best.....:banana:
officer protection?? i dont think that superseeds the constitution. actually it doesnt. when i was in afghan anyone could carry a ak47. we couldnt stop them or anything just cause they were carryin a ak or for what i would like to call "marine safty" they had more rights with guns over there then we do here.
Why was the guy in court? Was the OC/helmet issue relevant to the charge(s)? What was the outcome, other than insulting him?
Thanks, I'd already guessed that by checking out the episode guide.The case was regarding a repossession of the bike.
The only problem there, is that these shows are not court. They're legally binding arbitration, not courts of law.Had it been me, I'd've risked my case by objecting and accusing the judge of prejudicing my case by considering irrelevant facts in a negative light and in opposition to the current law!.
Thanks, I'd already guessed that by checking out the episode guide.
The only problem there, is that these shows are not court. They're legally binding arbitration, not courts of law.
Civil arbitrators have much wider latitude, and can say whatever they want. Those who enjoy big TV audiences say whatever will please the most viewers (thus advertisers). On the other hand, professional arbitrators who aren't on TV, rely on their reviews to get more cases, which means they have to be as neutral, objective, and fair as possible. If they're not, they don't get inflated ratings, they get fewer cases to mediate.
Thanks, I'd already guessed that by checking out the episode guide.
The only problem there, is that these shows are not court. They're legally binding arbitration, not courts of law.
Civil arbitrators have much wider latitude, and can say whatever they want. Those who enjoy big TV audiences say whatever will please the most viewers (thus advertisers). On the other hand, professional arbitrators who aren't on TV, rely on their reviews to get more cases, which means they have to be as neutral, objective, and fair as possible. If they're not, they don't get inflated ratings, they get fewer cases to mediate.
...You see if I'm not mistaken, Judge Alex is filmed in houston. So what happens in other states and their laws really don't matter here...