Judge John Roll - Killed in AZ attack was judge that ruled Brady Bill was unconstitutional

Among other judges.

Huge Hat Tip to Mrs. AF for pointing this out to me.

Quote:

---

In 1994, Roll was one of several district court judges who held that provisions of the Brady Law violated the Tenth Amendment,[2] a holding upheld by the Supreme Court in the related case of Printz v. United States.

---

There was also this:

Quote:

---

In 2009, Roll ruled that the case Vicente v. Barnett could go forward. The $32 million lawsuit brought by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) against Arizona rancher Roger Barnett on behalf of 16 Mexican plaintiffs charged that the plaintiffs were assaulted, threatened, and held at gunpoint by Barnett and members of his family. After Roll's ruling and prompted by several talk-radio programs, he was the subject of hundreds of complaining phone calls and death threats and he and his family were under the protection of the U.S. Marshals Service for a month.[3][4][5] Roll declined to press charges when some of those who made threats were identified.[6]

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Roll

He also allowed a case to go forward where illegal aliens wanted millions of dollars because a rancher pointed a gun at them on his own property.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...#ixzz1AW3hFsIN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Noob

He also allowed a case to go forward where illegal aliens wanted millions of dollars because a rancher pointed a gun at them on his own property.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...#ixzz1AW3hFsIN

---

If he forced them to stay on his property, I'd say that would be a good thing for the judge to have allowed it to go forward.

I have absolutely no problem with defending your property, but taking someone captive is a whole different ballgame.

I wonder why a Republican judge would drop by a Democratic campaign rally. they were of different generations so doubt they knew each other socially.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by __27__

If he forced them to stay on his property, I'd say that would be a good thing for the judge to have allowed it to go forward.

I have absolutely no problem with defending your property, but taking someone captive is a whole different ballgame.

---

Agreed, there's a HUGE difference between "get the fuck off my land" and unlawful imprisonment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freedom 4 all

Agreed, there's a HUGE difference between "get the fuck off my land" and unlawful imprisonment.

---

It also perfectly understandable why this was the outcome. The farmer obviously wanted to make a statement and his zealous pursuit of it ended up going overboard. Anyways the judge sounds like a constitutional guy, what would he be doing around a dem politician? Just curious.

Vote: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-the-Stoneages