Jury Nullification to restore the 2nd amendment

[tedw]

Let me be clear about one thing, I am not advocating that anyone break the unconstitutional gun laws that currently exist in the State of California.

Currently, no out of state of resident can apply for a concealed carry in California, and they cannot apply for an open carry license in most counties either (Should they have to? Voters don't have to apply for a license to vote and you don't have to apply for a license to go to church either-also fundamental rights)

Supporters of the second amendment should understand their power as Jurors. If some unfortunate soul is arrested and prosecuted for violating California's law, we, as jurors, have to power to acquit them. California courts routinely engage in brainwashing jurors during jury "Orientation" to believe they must accept the law as it is given to them by the Judge. It is a big lie and brainwashing.

The purpose of Jury system is to serve as check on governmental tyranny. California's current government is tyrannical, robbing some US citizens of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. We need to know what our rights as Juror's are. But don't look to the courts or the government school system to fully inform Jurors of their power.
Fully Informed Jury Association (fija.org)

[splithoof]

[ProfChaos]

I just served on a jury. There was an old betty that was convinced the guy was guilty and that cops are to be trusted and do not lie. We kept saying "innocent until PROVEN guilty". She was the mindset of guilty until proven innocent. At the end, we played the cops body cam and asked her where is the proof that the guy resisted arrest.

[MyOdessa]

Most "intelligent" people understand that it is their civic and constitutional duty to sit on the jury to render verdict on their peers, and not try to avoid the inconvenience of jury duty, especially in criminal cases.
I also disagree on "immigrant citizens who have no cultural connection to our constitution", as an immigrant and also familiar with other views immigrants of the like background, judging on posts of some of Calguns members, including some so-called "conservative" ones, we have better and deeper understanding of freedoms, duties and responsibilities the US Constitution provides and imposes on us, especially as it relates to libtards interpretation of it.

[splithoof]

I also disagree on "immigrant citizens who have no cultural connection to our constitution", as an immigrant and also familiar with other views immigrants of the like background, judging on posts of some of Calguns members, including some so-called "conservative" ones, we have better and deeper understanding of freedoms, duties and responsibilities the US Constitution provides and imposes on us, especially as it relates to libtards interpretation of it.

Im glad that you are of that mindset.
My experience however is mostly the opposite, as I see firsthand how a lot of foreign-born immigrants refuse to assimilate, insist that I recognize their heritage from where they came from, and provide for them in some fashion. A group of immigrants I know and see as friends for example, who belong to my church, tell me the exact same thing. They are deeply appreciative of our country, however they cite examples of those who are not, and abhor them for clogging up the system that would otherwise make it easier for good people to become citizens.

[Librarian]

Supporters of the second amendment should understand their power as Jurors. If some unfortunate soul is arrested and prosecuted for violating California's law, we, as jurors, have to power to acquit them. California courts routinely engage in brainwashing jurors during jury "Orientation" to believe they must accept the law as it is given to them by the Judge. It is a big lie and brainwashing.

And then the State appeals the verdict and we're back to the current condition.

[TTT]

I love the idea of jury nullification being widely applied against anti-gun laws, but the unfortunate truth is the majority of Californians are Democrats, and Democrats hate guns and gun owners.

[riderr]

OP, you have to make a jury consisting of 12 pro-2A Californians out of the juror's pool. Man, it's easier to hit the jackpot.

[tedw]

And then the State appeals the verdict and we're back to the current condition.

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."---Seventh Amendment

[tedw]

OP, you have to make a jury consisting of 12 pro-2A Californians out of the juror's pool. Man, it's easier to hit the jackpot.

In heavily urban and democratic area I am sure that is true. Rural Republican areas, maybe not. In any event, it only takes one person to hang a jury.

[tedw]

I love the idea of jury nullification being widely applied against anti-gun laws, but the unfortunate truth is the majority of Californians are Democrats, and Democrats hate guns and gun owners.

Second Amendment sanctuary - Wikipedia

I like the idea of second amendment sanctuary cities. A few California cities have done it. Even if it does not have the force of law, a juror could bring it up in a jury room.

[RickD427]

Relying on Jury Nullification is a horrible idea. You only have to do the math, and consider the consequences, to see the reasons why.

With the volume of court cases flowing through our legal system, you can expect to see some individual cases where Jury Nullification has occurred, but those are very few in relation to the number of cases adjudicated.

For Jury Nullification to work, you need to get all 12 jurors to act contrary to their jury instructions. That's a pretty tall order. If only one of the twelve remains true to the instructions, the effort fails. When that happens, expect a retrial with a new jury.

You also need to consider the consequence of losing the effort, that is a criminal conviction on the original charge, along with all of the penalties.

[riderr]

In heavily urban and democratic area I am sure that is true. Rural Republican areas, maybe not. In any event, it only takes one person to hang a jury.

Hung jury is a very different concept than the jury nullification.

[Librarian]

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."---Seventh Amendment

California: they'll litigate the First and Second, so adding the Seventh would not be out of character.

[MountainLion]

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."---Seventh Amendment

If you ignore the parts that I underlined and bolded, no jury verdict could ever be appealed. But they are, all the time. That's because of the bolded and underlined parts. So before you rely on your narrow interpretation of the 7A, you might want to learn what the "rules of common law" are.