I have been called for Jury duty!!!

[gogodawgs]

Cite.

The state was created to protect individual rights. The definitions I read of statist are those who believe in the power of the state to have central control.

Mandating a citizen partake in jury duty is contrary to the idea of a free society and being judged by your peers not people conscripted into service who don't want to be there.

I'm going to use an internet definition that is fairly close because I can't go dig out 4 or 5 books I have in my library and post them here. While it is a primary purpose to protect individual rights it is not the only purpose of the state.

Statism (French; étatisme) is a term used by political scientists to describe the belief that, for whatever reason, a government should control either economic or social policy or both to some degree.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] Statism is effectively the opposite of anarchism.[SUP][4][/SUP][SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP] Statism can take many forms. Minarchists prefer a minimal or night watchman state to protect people from aggression,theft, breach of contract, and fraud with military, police, and courts.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP] Some may also include fire departments, prisons, and other functions.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP] Totalitarians prefer a maximum or all encompassing state.[SUP][9][/SUP][SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11][/SUP][SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP]Limited government, welfare state, and other options make up the middle territory of the scale of statism.[SUP][14][/SUP][SUP][15][/SUP] Some anarchists use the term statist in a derogatory sense.[SUP][16][/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP]

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I'm going to use an internet definition that is fairly close because I can't go dig out 4 or 5 books I have in my library and post them here. While it is a primary purpose to protect individual rights it is not the only purpose of the state.

Statism (French; étatisme) is a term used by political scientists to describe the belief that, for whatever reason, a government should control either economic or social policy or both to some degree.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] Statism is effectively the opposite of anarchism.[SUP][4][/SUP][SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP] Statism can take many forms. Minarchists prefer a minimal or night watchman state to protect people from aggression,theft, breach of contract, and fraud with military, police, and courts.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP] Some may also include fire departments, prisons, and other functions.[SUP][5][/SUP][SUP][6][/SUP][SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP] Totalitarians prefer a maximum or all encompassing state.[SUP][9][/SUP][SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11][/SUP][SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP]Limited government, welfare state, and other options make up the middle territory of the scale of statism.[SUP][14][/SUP][SUP][15][/SUP] Some anarchists use the term statist in a derogatory sense.[SUP][16][/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP]

And a statist would the one who believes the state has the power or the monopoly to enforce what ever level of control they want, so again it matters not how broad you want to define it, when the bottom line is giving the state the monopoly on force and not letting the ultimate decision be in the hands of free people we have no freedom and a statist is not a good thing. I shouldn't have to be forced to pay for fire protection when volunteer fire departments work great. I shouldn't have to be forced to do jury duty when my decision would be to undermine the power of the people to force me to do that duty. I think this is why judges and prosecutors will remove people for the knowledge of nullification, and why they don't inform people of their right to judge the law.


I'll stick to the more commonly accepted meaning of the word statism/statist.....and when Justice Sanders called the other Judges statist I think he was doing the same.

[h=2]stat·ism[/h] 


noun1.the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic,political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.

2.support of or belief in the sovereignty of a state, usually arepublic.

World English Dictionary

statism (ˈsteɪtɪzəm)
— n
	the theory or practice of concentrating economic and politicalpower in the state, resulting in a weak position for the individual or community with respect to the government

​

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Since I didn't want to break out my Ludwig Von Mises...I post another study on what the true meaning of statism is.

http://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/sttism.htm
Statism is used here to describe a 20th-century global trend which sought to reverse the dominant 19th-century trends -- e.g., liberalism and conservatism. The 19th-century spectrum of European political life was squeezed from both sides, left and right as if the tips of our iconic omega were a powerful pinching jaw

 

[Stanley]

Mandating a citizen partake in jury duty is contrary to the idea of a free society and being judged by your peers not people conscripted into service who don't want to be there.

Who ever wants to be there?

I imagine if we left it up to volunteers there'd either be no juries or juries filled with people you don't want on the jury.

I've always believed any benefit gained from living in a society comes with the onus of living up to certain responsibilities.

The freedom still exists. If one does not wish or care to live up to those responsibilities they are quite free to live elsewhere.

Now, what those responsibilities should be should be decided by the people and not the government of course.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Who ever wants to be there?

I imagine if we left it up to volunteers there'd either be no juries or juries filled with people you don't want on the jury.

I've always believed any benefit gained from living in a society comes with the onus of living up to certain responsibilities.

The freedom still exists. If one does not wish or care to live up to those responsibilities they are quite free to live elsewhere.

Now, what those responsibilities should be should be decided by the people and not the government of course.

This wasn't the case in the early years of our country, people were anti-statist, they believed they had the power to thwart the government and showed up voluntarily I believe if people were educated on the true nature of a jury it would be the same, I changed my mind, The Op of this thread did too, I wanted to avoid the system at all costs I will now show up knowing my duty is to thwart statism.

You can believe what you want show me where it is mandated I have these responsibilities in the constitution? If you want to live in a society where your duties are mandated, why don't you move somewhere else?

Freedom still exists? Or the illusion of freedom. Why aren't judges following Justice Godloe's advice of instructing the jury on their right to nullify laws? Why can you be removed for knowing your right as a juror?

So you believe in democracy in the form of what the majority wants should be the law of the land?

I would like people to look up the first time the word statism and statist was used in modern history, it wasn't used in a broad sense that we were all statist in one form or another it was used to be the opposite of individualism.

I may suggest, Ludwig Von Mises, Murray N. Rothbard, and Ayn Rand, Freidriech Hayak.

I will not accept statism as a good word or good thing just as I wont accept "nationalism" as a good word or good thing.

 

[Metalhead47]

I shouldn't have to be forced to pay for fire protection when volunteer fire departments work great. I shouldn't have to be forced to do jury duty when my decision would be to undermine the power of the people to force me to do that duty.

I remember we got into the fire department thing once before. The trouble with an all-volunteer force, is that they only work well in a small community... and someone STILL has to pay for the equipment, fire hall, etc. Now that aside, choosing to leave in a society inevitably means giving up some measure of personal liberty. You can't set up a plinking target that's directly in front of your neighbor's house, for instance. That's not statism, that's just reality. It's the same compromise human beings have been making since someone realized it was easier to avoid becoming dinner when living in a cave with other people.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I remember we got into the fire department thing once before. The trouble with an all-volunteer force, is that they only work well in a small community... and someone STILL has to pay for the equipment, fire hall, etc. Now that aside, choosing to leave in a society inevitably means giving up some measure of personal liberty. You can't set up a plinking target that's directly in front of your neighbor's house, for instance. That's not statism, that's just reality. It's the same compromise human beings have been making since someone realized it was easier to avoid becoming dinner when living in a cave with other people.

70% of our nations fire departments are volunteer. We have discussed that before. It's silly to force me to pay for something I don't want because others took a vote.

I agree your example isn't statism, our liberty ends at infringing on someone else's liberty or if it causes harm to others. That is what government is for to protect my neighbors liberty not to have bullets travel through there property. Force would be justified in that instance force is not justified in coercing someone to serve on a jury.

The notion that we "owe" the government something is a progressive statist notion entrenched in the chauvinistic myth of nationalism that became well entrenched after the tyrant Lincoln shredded our Federalist (not national) system.

 

[Citizen]

My goodness, what a discussion I seem to have (instigated?).

I like the definitions proffered for statism; each has useful points. The most comprehensive seems to be the belief in state sovereignty.

But, lets not lose sight of things in an argument over the minute meaning of the word statist or statism. Its just a word. We have tons and tons of policy points and infringements between total statism and anarchism.

 

[Citizen]

SNIP I remember we got into the fire department thing once before. The trouble with an all-volunteer force, is that they only work well in a small community... and someone STILL has to pay for the equipment, fire hall, etc. Now that aside, choosing to leave in a society inevitably means giving up some measure of personal liberty. You can't set up a plinking target that's directly in front of your neighbor's house, for instance. That's not statism, that's just reality. It's the same compromise human beings have been making since someone realized it was easier to avoid becoming dinner when living in a cave with other people.

Metalhead,

This is a common misconception about personal liberty, too often promoted by people who want to infringe some freedom. This is the granddaddy of the "sensitive places" exception in Heller from our federal supreme court. Of course, it is always the government who defines which liberties are given up in order to live in society.

Too many have the idea that liberty means doing whatever one wants. Personal liberty does not include harming others. Harming others is not liberty; it is offense.

I would argue that recognition of rights is the definition of civilization. In fact, I would argue that the lack of liberty is a carryover from primitive times when certain people did not treat others with genuine civility. That is to say, those who refuse to recognize many, many liberties for others are the uncivilized ones and we're still fighting them after 50,000 years.

 

[rapgood]

Irrespective of the oath that you are forced to take when being sworn in as a juror (quare whether they can actually REQUIRE you to take an oath when you have no choice but to be there), the "oath" MUST be lawful. If it "requires" you to relinquish a constitutional right (such as the RIGHT to jury nullification), then the oath is not lawful.

From http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_Jurors_Handbook.pdf

"You are bound by the oath that you took at the beginning of
the trial to follow the instructions that I give you, even if
you personally disagree with them."82 If the jurors
explicitly ask about nullification, we are told that the
judge should warn them of the supposed "fact" that
acquittal of a guilty man for any reason would be a
breach of their solemn oaths as jurors.83"

Hmm sounds like intimidation and coercion


Here is more good info on Juries and our Rights

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Irrespective of the oath that you are forced to take when being sworn in as a juror (quare whether they can actually REQUIRE you to take an oath when you have no choice but to be there), the "oath" MUST be lawful. If it "requires" you to relinquish a constitutional right (such as the RIGHT to jury nullification), then the oath is not lawful.

The intimidation and coercion element is there. I had a conversation with my friend not long ago who served on a jury I told him you know you are not obligated to follow the jury7 instructions if you disagree with the law. Nope he said the judge gave them strict orders that they had too follow the instruction and he wasn't going to disobey those orders....:banghead:

 

[Citizen]

The intimidation and coercion element is there. I had a conversation with my friend not long ago who served on a jury I told him you know you are not obligated to follow the jury7 instructions if you disagree with the law. Nope he said the judge gave them strict orders that they had too follow the instruction and he wasn't going to disobey those orders....

I imagine it's a function of which gets their first--the judges instructions or the knowledge about juror powers to restrain government. I can see someone who doesn't know any better, or is a little shaky on his certainty, defaulting to the judges instructions.

Educating people in advance is the surest cure.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I imagine it's a function of which gets their first--the judges instructions or the knowledge about juror powers to restrain government. I can see someone who doesn't know any better, or is a little shaky on his certainty, defaulting to the judges instructions.

Educating people in advance is the surest cure.

I agree, I am thinking about ordering a whole bunch of those brochures from FIJ, and going down town and handing them out.

My buddy wouldn't even listen to the real responsibility after, it's one reason why I decided to do jury duty if called because other wise it gets full of positivist who think, that someone must pay if they broke the law. Regardless if it is an unjust law or there were no victims. Or people who think well to be on trial he must be guilty of something .

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

I agree, I am thinking about ordering a whole bunch of those brochures from FIJ, and going down town and handing them out. ...

Should we take a clue from the name of the Fully Informed Jury, that is not called the fully educated jury association, to correct our use of education?

We may inform of open carry, or rights or the capabilities of a fully informed jury, but an invincible dumb bass will not be educated against his wishes or principles.

If Joni Bonavia could be educated then Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt would not have had reason to write The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf 6.75 MB 700 pages

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

Denver juror who lied to get out of duty arrested after bragging on talk radio

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...o-lied-get-out-duty-arrested-after?source=rss

Denver District Court Judge Anne Mansfield — presiding over jury selection June 28 — quickly dismissed the woman, who explained in disjointed speech, "I broke out of domestic violence in the military. And I have a lot of repercussions. One is post-traumatic stress disorder."

Now Juror No. 4361 — published author and Denver cosmetologist Susan Cole — faces felony charges after allegedly bragging months later on a radio program that she fabricated the elaborate ruse to duck jury duty.

Turns out, Judge Mansfield was listening.

A Class 4 felony.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...o-lied-get-out-duty-arrested-after?source=rss
A Class 4 felony.

And that's why you just start talking LOUDLY about your Jurist's Right of Nullification: so they just kick you loose asap. If you have knowledge, they want you gone asap.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Should we take a clue from the name of the Fully Informed Jury, that is not called the fully educated jury association, to correct our use of education?

We may inform of open carry, or rights or the capabilities of a fully informed jury, but an invincible dumb bass will not be educated against his wishes or principles.

If Joni Bonavia could be educated then Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt would not have had reason to write The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/MomsPDFs/DDDoA.sml.pdf 6.75 MB 700 pages

I have downloaded that 700 page beast....lol..

I agree some refuse education...shouldn't thwart our attempt to try because some are just naive and love learning more.

 

[Hannah Padilla]

Just to get the ideas out there for as many readers as possible, and because it upsets some statist who manages to show up whenever I post about it:


An Essay on the Trial by Jury by Lysander Spooner 1852. Definitely read Section I. You will know more about the function of the jury in our system than 99% of the population. You will also see how the government has perverted jury policies in the last 160 years. Its a real eye-opener.
http://lysanderspooner.org/node/35


FIJA (Fully Informed Jury Assoc.) http://fija.org/ Our 5th Amendment video Professor, James Duane, is a member and you can read some of his stuff there. For example, this Juror's Handbook at FIJA was written by him: http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_Jurors_Handbook.pdf

Hey! Your link to the jurors' handbook is broken. I found the file on another site: Jurors' Handbook, a Citizens Guide to Jury Duty - James J. Duane
Hope this helps anyone.

 

[color of law]

Hey! Your link to the jurors' handbook is broken. I found the file on another site: Jurors' Handbook, a Citizens Guide to Jury Duty - James J. Duane
Hope this helps anyone.

Thanks, but you know your response is to a link that is going on 7 years old.