- Quickdraw McLaw
- 14 Comments
- 232 Views
- The Las Vegas City Council approved a $280,000 settlement in a revenge porn case involving the fire department. [KTNV]
- The case in which a woman is accusing soccer star Christiano Ronaldo of rape may be headed for trial. [KXNT]
- Lawsuit against UFC’s Dana White dismissed in sex tape case. [RJ]
- Nevada officials have suspended the policy of 80% of inmates’ funds to restitution. [TNI]
Hey Libs, remember when you elected Halverson for Judge?
Put the "kool-aid" away. You only elect a socialist government once. Keep America Great!
And to remain specifically relevant to the blog, the 2nd Amendment is the BEST.
Love me some 2nd amendment. Remember that time assault weapons were banned and this was constitutionally permissible? Looking forward to bringing that beat back.
NFA is unconstitutional as well
Leave it to 9:57 to blame the liberals for the result in a non-partisan judicial race from 2006. If you need to blame someone, blame Halvorson's opponent in that election — Bill Henderson.
Also, you have to love the fact that the "You only elect a socialist government once. Keep America Great!" tag line originates from Russian operated troll farms in Romania. At some point 9:57, you need to reengage your critical thinking and stop being so easily manipulated by political propaganda. Here's a hint: If all of the blasts you receive on Facebook and all of the pop-up ads on your computer relate to civil unrest, the plight of the white male and socialism, you have been identified as a weak-minded individual susceptible manipulation. There is a 42 year-old woman in Eastern Europe who is manipulating your thoughts between rounds of Candy Crush. Sad, but true.
10:03 – while you are correct that there was an "assault rifle" (whatever that may be) ban in the past, you, as an attorney, I am sure is well aware that the constitutionality of that Ban was never tested by SCOTUS, and it is unlikely to survive the strict scrutiny test if ever tested by SCOTUS, especially if ACB will join as a Justice in the next few weeks.
Having said that – I may propose something you may agree with – a national certification, testing, registry and proficiency exam for all conceal carry licenses. A person would have to attend federally mandated training, pass any written tests, pass full background check, pass a safety and firearm proficiency test, including accuracy of shooting, loading and unloading the firearm – and than, after paying feds his or her fee, they would be licensed to carry a firearm in every single state of the union, as a federal recognized license.
that way all of the fears would be eliminated – since, after all, not a single licensed concealed carry weapons permit holder had ever committed a mass shooting in the U.S.
After all – " “The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving — which is a privilege, not a right — then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.” – Donald J. Trump (2015)
11:20-That was a 50%/50% race, with Halverson receiving slightly more raw votes.
You can blame Henderson if you want, but Hindsight is 20/20. Were attorneys warning everyone during the race about how horrible Halverson would be? No.
Was anyone assuming that she would clearly lose and that therefore her opponents needed no support? If anyone assumed she had no chance to win so they ignored the race, they should have aware that she came within one percentage point, two years earlier, of defeating Judge Gerald Hardcastle–a judge with very high name recognition, whose name-recognition was further greatly solidified by the fact his wife, the other Judge Hardcastle, was of course also on the bench at that time, and was the current Chief Judge.
That all said, if you want to blame Henderson, then blame all the candidates who were eliminated in the Primary(in this very crowded race where Halverson was the only female). These included future judge Villani and Wiese, and Chief Attorney General Gerald Gardner, etc.
I'm not taking up for Henderson. I assume there are things he could and should have done differently(in fact I know there are), but I am concerned about the very simplistic and conveniently judgmental approach of 11:20 .
We all have responsibility to follow these matters and get involved, and reflect on the type of people who are running for the bench(or applying for a vacancy).
Instead, completely unqualified, and sometimes very strange, people run for office, and when they sometimes win we all act so shocked at how they then perform in office, and we conveniently look for someone to blame–usually the main opponent from such race. But would it not be much better if we get involved prior to a disaster, rather than acting so offended and shocked later on?
Agree with some of what 12:54 wrote, but there was no need to respond as 9:57 and 11:20 based their posts on false premises.
No one can seriously claim that "the Libs" put Halverson in office. She was in fact a registered republican, and, unlike her opponent, openly espoused very conservative, republican principles.
She railled against activist courts, and spoke extensively on "originally intent" , etc.
What 12:54 is right about is that these posts(9:57 and 11:20) are conveniently assuming things after the fact that happen to be totally false.
9:57 assumes that the "libs" put Halverson in office, which has no basis in truth as she performed much better with Republican voters than Democrat. And 11:20 assumes that everyone knew before hand exactly what a disaster Halverson would be on the bench, and then seeks to retroactively point the finger of blame entirely at one person. If everyone knew that in advance(how horrible she would be) then why did her opponents(both in the Primary and General election) not receive a large amount of financial support form attorneys? Check the records. They are available on line.
Long story short,I think we all agree that we can all do better in these judicial races rather than just complaining after the fact. I always have contributed financially. I realize due to covid and other economic concerns many attorneys cannot contribute to these races.
But if you can't, then please do something. If a race has a solid candidate opposed by someone who seems substandard, then do whatever you can–even if it's just displaying a yard sign for the favored candidate, making suggestions and observations to people who have no idea about the judicial candidates, etc.
So basically the gist of 9:57 AM post and responses: i) Don't believe everything you read; and ii) there are bad actors that make inaccurate statements either intentionally, or negligently.
When I was a kid a common retort was "don't believe everything you read." Seems like a whole lotta people either didn't get, or understand the message
12:54 and 1:07, I'll admit I don't know that much detail about some race that was like 15 years ago, so I can't comment on the validity of the facts and arguments offered. I never do that much of a deep dive on judicial races or deconstruct such matters with that degree of analysis.
But I do tend to get behind the candidate,in each judicial race,who I think would be the better addition to the race. Some years I would contribute to judicial races, but this year I did not.
That all said, although those posts include a lot of historical info. that I don't know enough about to comment on one way or the other, I do agree with the more general premise offered that we as lawyers, in general, would be well-served to get more involved in judicial elections(and judicial appointments as well).
Just received my ballot. I am voting for Susan Bush for Court of Appeals and Romeo Perez for Family Court. The only tow people I am excited to he voting for.
Just glad that you're voting since, as 12:54, 1:47 and 3:41 argue, people need to at least start getting involved in these judicial races on some level. And the first step is to actually vote in these races, and to know something about some of the candidates, and be reasonably enthused to vote–at least as to a few of the judicial races.
Interesting that being likeable and friendly can go a long way in judicial races. No one has ever confused Romeo Perez with a Rhodes Scholar, but everyone speaks of how decent, pleasant, and honorable he is as a practitioner.
Two
We have Democrat Governor, Assembly and Senate, and a majority of women in both houses and on the bench. Is that cause for concern?
The Democrats hate victims. The thought of some gangbangers direct deposits being garnished brings Aaron to tears! Forget the victims. They will likely vote for D's anyways, and ballot stuffing will take the edge off any tight races.
Time to focus on the real victims of the criminal justice system: the criminals.