HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Clearly, reestablishing M...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 10:26 PM

Clearly, reestablishing Magna Carta is an unrealistic Left Wing goal....

People who walk around muttering "jury of peers" and "due process" are just NOT to be taken seriously. If we want to realistically challenge the "Divine Right of Kings", we on the Left are going to have to set our sights a tad lower.

Myself, I think I could live with a ban on Drawing and Quartering. Surely simple beheading is more merciful and there's always Burning at the Stake for more serious cases. There are some progressive states that want to introduce a new concept called Trial by Ordeal, but I just don't think that Red States are ready for that yet.

Remember: Small incremental improvements always win the day over dangerous, radical change.

36 replies, 2349 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 36 replies Author Time Post
Reply Clearly, reestablishing Magna Carta is an unrealistic Left Wing goal.... (Original post)
Junkdrawer Feb 2013 OP
WillyT Feb 2013 #1
progressoid Feb 2013 #2
Recursion Feb 2013 #3
MNBrewer Feb 2013 #6
Recursion Feb 2013 #7
MNBrewer Feb 2013 #9
Recursion Feb 2013 #12
MNBrewer Feb 2013 #13
Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #27
Recursion Feb 2013 #32
Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #33
Recursion Feb 2013 #35
Dragonfli Feb 2013 #4
MNBrewer Feb 2013 #10
rhett o rick Feb 2013 #15
Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #17
kath Feb 2013 #20
Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #25
tama Feb 2013 #29
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #5
Recursion Feb 2013 #8
MNBrewer Feb 2013 #11
Recursion Feb 2013 #14
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #22
Democracyinkind Feb 2013 #26
OnyxCollie Feb 2013 #16
Amimnoch Feb 2013 #28
Herlong Feb 2013 #18
Herlong Feb 2013 #19
JDPriestly Feb 2013 #21
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #24
Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #30
Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #23
T_i_B Feb 2013 #31
Octafish Feb 2013 #34
LineNew Reply ^
Wilms Feb 2013 #36

Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 10:33 PM

1. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:37 PM

2. Pffft. Pre - 9/11 thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:39 PM

3. "Jury of your peers" was because the King was letting commoners try nobles

The nobles didn't like that. The Magna Carta isn't a very good document in a lot of ways, and there's a reason that phrase is nowhere in the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #3)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:51 PM

6. Good reason to get rid of the whole concept of constraint on the power of the executive, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #6)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:55 PM

7. The barons were the original teabaggers

I'm actually kind of sympathetic to John. He got a bad rap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #7)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:00 AM

9. Indeed, Absolute Monarchy IS to be defended

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #9)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:03 AM

12. He was never an absolute monarch like in France

The British monarchy was never that strong. What he did was assert his right to hear commoners' appeals from baronial judgements.

And unlike his brother Richard the Lionhearted, he actually spoke English and lived in England.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #12)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:05 AM

13. That makes it all better

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #3)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 06:26 AM

27. The Right to a Jury of One's Peers

The Sixth Amendment rights associated with trial proceedings -- the right to a speedy trial, the right to a public trial and the right to be judged by a jury of one's peers -- are so bound together by circumstance and tradition that it is almost inconceivable to separate them. Still, each of these parallel rights has developed in its own manner through the centuries.

The right of a person to be tried by a jury of one's peers is traditionally founded on a provision contained in Chapter 29 of that great document of English law, the Magna Carta. That provision, written in 1225, states: "No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will we not pass upon him, nor (condemn him), but by lawful judgment of his own peers, or by the law of the land."

Subsequent generations -- including the authors of the Bill of Rights -- came to regard this provision as one of the principal legal guarantees of liberty under the common law. This belief came on the basis that the clause not only provided for a formal trial for any alleged wrongdoer instead of arbitrary judgment and summary execution, but also on the basis that it provided for trial by jury. They felt the phrase " . . . but by lawful judgment of his peers" ensured a fair trial and provided a safeguard against unwarranted interference with the rights and liberties of the subject.

Congress, in discussing policy regarding jury service, said: "It is the policy of the United States that all litigants in federal courts entitled to trial by jury shall have the right to grand and petit juries selected at random from a fair cross-section of the community in the district or division wherein the court convenes. It is also the policy of the United States that all citizens shall have the opportunity to be considered for service on grand and petit juries in the district courts of the United States, and shall have an obligation to serve as jurors when called for that purpose."

....


http://members.mobar.org/civics/jury%20of%20peers.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Reply #27)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:49 AM

32. It's the word "peers" we got rid of

Because it was about nobles not being tried by commoners.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #32)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:04 AM

33. The text of the Magna Carta emphasizes "freeman" and seems to use the word peer...

as a synonym for equal more than "a member of the peerage".

"No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will we not pass upon him, nor (condemn him), but by lawful judgment of his own peers, or by the law of the land."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Reply #33)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:13 AM

35. It's not peers in the sense of "peers of the realm"

Earls had to be tried by earls, counts by counts, etc. It means no class could be called to account by a lower class (the classes above you had bonds of vassalage to do that). John introduced juries composed of all free men for all free men, and the nobles went apeshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:49 PM

4. whooo...zlow down there sport

I may not be as extreme left as you, but I only vote Democratic, so I assure you my liberal cred is intact.

I sympathize with your goals, but the best way to achieve sensible incremental goals is by listening to the the position of your most extreme opponents and find a middle ground between that and our most moderate (thus sensible) ideas, that is the only method of choosing a starting point for negotiations that will ever prove successful, your position is simply too extreme to be "electable".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:01 AM

10. Voting only Democratic is no assurance of "liberal cred"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:19 AM

15. No you slow down. You think that voting Democratic assures liberal what?

I believe you would have called this countries founders as "extreme". When people are being subjugated, it is time foe extreme measures.

Plez explain how a liberal cred like you differs from the extreme left. Tell us what issues the extreme left are fighting for that you disagree with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:31 AM

17. Too subtle for this crowd.

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:07 AM

20. WHOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSHHHHH!

Right over their heads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 06:07 AM

25. Point taken. Progress is not to be measured from where we are...

but rather from where we could be if we allowed the Right complete, unchallenged reign.

Some will object: "Don't you see? That's WHY we've been moving backwards and why we're reduced to begging for Magna Carta to be reestablished." Fortunately, they are in a tiny minority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dragonfli (Reply #4)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:30 AM

29. Why elect academic scholar of Constitution?

 

"Know thy enemy."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:50 PM

5. Don't forget keel-hauling. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #5)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:57 PM

8. Keels hadn't been invented yet

Neither had rudders. (Irrelevant, I know, but I'm reading a naval history book right now and thought I would share.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #8)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:03 AM

11. When were they invented??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MNBrewer (Reply #11)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:06 AM

14. They come with the lateen

You don't really need one if you only sail with the wind ("large"); you only need them to sail against the wind ("by" -- guess what phrase those lead to?) I guess the Arabs had already invented them, but they didn't make it to Europe until after the crusades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:35 AM

22. You learn something every day. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #22)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 06:14 AM

26. From his posts you really do. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:29 AM

16. Let's be international and bring in necklacing. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnyxCollie (Reply #16)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 06:29 AM

28. I had to look that up. I wish I hadn't now.

how horrific.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:34 AM

18. Small incremental improvements

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Herlong (Reply #18)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:38 AM

19. This is entirely unrelated

 

let me direct you to my frogs



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:21 AM

21. K&R. Wonderful.

Magna Carta -- 1215. We survived almost 900 years with the rights guaranteed by the Magna Carta challenged and transgressed now and then but always the hallmark of English law. And now, here we are having to fight once again for the simple rights of a free person: the rights to notice and to be heard, the right to a jury of one's peers and, hopefully, a judge who is fair.

No president should have the right to kill someone without notice and the right to be heard, without a fair trial.

Those living or fighting in a war zone have at least some notice if no right to be heard. But these drones are being used in a way that completely violates this basic tenet of a free society.

Don't even use the word free if you don't have an inalienable right to a trial -- to notice and to be heard -- because if you don't have those rights, you are not free.

More about the Magna Carta.

The 1215 charter required King John of England to proclaim certain liberties and accept that his will was not arbitrary—for example by explicitly accepting that no "freeman" (in the sense of non-serf) could be punished except through the law of the land, a right that still exists.

Magna Carta was the first document forced onto a King of England by a group of his subjects, the feudal barons, in an attempt to limit his powers by law and protect their privileges. It was preceded and directly influenced by the Charter of Liberties in 1100, in which King Henry I had specified particular areas wherein his powers would be limited.

Despite its recognised importance, by the second half of the 19th century nearly all of its clauses had been repealed in their original form. Three clauses currently remain part of the law of England and Wales, however, and it is generally considered part of the uncodified constitution. Lord Denning described it as "the greatest constitutional document of all times – the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot". In a 2005 speech, Lord Woolf described it as "first of a series of instruments that now are recognised as having a special constitutional status", the others being the Habeas Corpus Act (1679), the Petition of Right (1628), the Bill of Rights (1689), and the Act of Settlement (1701).

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

Drones should never be used within the United States or to target American citizens. Let's at least start there. And why do I say we should not use them to target American citizens? Because the Constitution prohibits our government from denying the right of habeas corpus other than in insurrection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #21)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:37 AM

24. Excellent post. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #21)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:44 AM

30. "Don't even use the word free if you don't have an inalienable right to a trial..."

Very, very well put.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:36 AM

23. epic thread

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:48 AM

31. Here in the country that gave the world Magna Carta......

.......the only people who bring Magna Carta up in political debate are obsessive UKIP types citing Magna Carta in rants about Ted Heath and the evils of the European Union.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:08 AM

34. We are facing a new type of existential threat, an enemy unlike any foe before...

You know, the gangster state, our own.

http://www.michaelparenti.org/JFKAssassination.html


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junkdrawer (Original post)

Fri Feb 8, 2013, 05:45 PM

36. ^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread