Results 1 to 7 of 7

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

  1. #1
    Needs a bigger boat Anti Federalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    In a Nine Line Bind
    Posts
    54,233
    Blog Entries
    12

    Exclamation 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.

    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:
    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
    "It's a Free Country."
    "They hate us for our Freedoms."
    "The troops are protecting your Freedom."




    You're not nuts! You're FISHERMEN!!!



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    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

  4. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    1,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Noob View Post
    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.

  5. #4

    Default

    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.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by __27__ View Post
    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.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom 4 all View Post
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cowlesy View Post
    Americans in general are jedi masters of blaming every other person.

  8. #7
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc


    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •