Law-making in Tennessee and how law applies to YOU and not THEM
People often wonder where all these laws come from, laws that seem to be engulfing your
every move. Sure, I suppose many of the thousands, upon thousands of laws could be
perceived as for the “Public Good”, but just how good is it to slowly erode your freedoms?
When you think about it, a lawmaker can skip up to a state capital and introduce virtually
any sort of Bill and once passed, it becomes another law that YOU must follow, or else…
It does seem funny though that although public officials spout off how we are a “nation of
laws” and “rule of law” and all that other patriotic sounding hype, but have you ever
noticed that these laws of the land and so-called rules of law never seem to apply to the
people that make them, enforce them or adjudicate them? I detest anyone telling me we ALL
must abide by the law but then when we look around we see people that seem to be above
the law. In YOUR town or county, do you know of any such people?
For example, where does a woman go if she is a victim of spousal abuse? Naturally, she
can call the cops and in the state of Tennessee the result is “preferred arrest”. Many states
have a domestic law policy of mandatory arrest, but Tennessee opted for not "mandating"
arrest, just "preferring" arrest instead. Okydokie…
Now this within itself may be a great law for some, but does it protect all women who are
victims? I am going to go out on a limb and say NO, as law does not apply equally to
everyone. I think the sooner people get it through their heads that certain people are above
the law the sooner they can settle into their contented existence of being a slave and never
a master over the very government they are supposed to own. Totally unbelievable for
grown ups to be totally beaten down and subdued into thinking how other grown adults
know what's best for them, or should I say "best for YOU".
What would you think if I walked up to you and said that I am going to take your house,
your daughters, your dog, your money, your wife, your left hand, your food, your right
foot, and while I am stripping you of everything, I am saying that I am doing it "for your
own good"? Isn't that just about the same as me saying, "Give me your guns and I will
protect you"? I mean come on, just how stupid does that sound?
Can you honestly imagine being forced to rely upon a person who cannot speak publicly
without a quivering nervous voice, who is borderline retarded can somehow protect you
from harm? Now I could easily see such person of that caliber slithering around trying to
sneak a few coins out of your pockets, but not as some sort of protector. Some of these
dudes can't even protect themselves. What was that again, America is the what...oh, it's the
"home of the brave". I almost forgot...
To continue this little example as to how YOU are NOT equal in the blind folded eyes of the
law, let me pose a couple questions to you. Do you think Judge Jim McKenzie would ever
be arrested in Rhea County for being public drunk? My answer is NO he would not. I mean
come on folks, just who in the county would arrest him? And before what judge would you
even take him? One of his judge friends? See how easy that one was…
What if a young lady was getting the heck beat out of her by a husband who lacks self
esteem, is cowardly and who is borderline stupid through a basic ignorance? What if the
fellow in this example who was so insecure in himself, his abilities and his overall failure of being
his own man happened to be a police officer? What if the fellow was a police chief? Would
the young lady be able to pick up the phone and call the police and have the police come
and put their boss in jail? Do you honestly think the chief would go to jail?
Well there you have it folks. Just a couple really simple and vague reasons or scenarios
that clearly establish a prima facia showing of LIBERTY AND JUSTICE…FOR SOME!!! Now,
you will notice that I have NOT mentioned any names in these examples just as I will not
use more examples, along with public record divorce proceedings that would indeed make
a quivering voice even more quivered. I think my point has been made that YOU are not
equal to mayors, judges, police, councilmen, commissioners, bla, bla, bla…
You know, if you were to place a single elected public office in to each of these scenarios I
think a person could argue that perhaps, just perhaps a different outcome could happen.
Take for example as in the above example of a police officer, or even a chief of police that
was beating his wife and she were to call her local District Constable, then what? The
constable owes no allegiance to any person or persons beyond those who elected him.
People can spout off about how they are not trained and all that other crap but that
argument must fail. Modern day police are trained in academies and lawsuits against
officers is constantly on the rise. Why is that? How do so-called professional police
officers keep getting sued?
Could it be because THEY each know that even if THEY get sued and by some miracle
THEY lost the lawsuit THEY do not pay a dime, YOU PAY? A poor old Tennessee constable
historically has always had to pay for his own actions because he always acted under a
color of law at his own peril. The constable was solely accountable for his actions, not the
public he/she served. I dare any person reading this to find one civil case where a
county was held liable for the actions of a constable in the state of Tennessee. Go ahead,
someone send me just one case. You know, any person with a
fair and rational mind would indeed wonder why sheriffs, police chiefs and other politicians
hate the office of constable. I mean, after all, who can blame them for not wanting some
elected official with authority essentially equal to that of a sheriff, running around outside the pandora's
box messing up everyone’s money makin’ playground, right?
If I have said it once I've said it a thousand times...I by far would rather have an under-
educated constable that doesn't cost a single cent in tax money "protecting me" than to
have an under-educated policeman that costs millions of tax dollars a year "protecting
me". Remember folks, these people are called "FIRST RESPONDERS". The reason would
seem rather clear that they simply "respond" after the fact of something that has already
happened, period. You could have an army of cops in your tiny town and still they can not
protect you. You must protect yourself. By having more and more police simply means
more and more money wasted in the name of "keeping you safe". No wonder politicians
just love the public school indoctrination system. To keep people too dumbed down to
realize the difference between clear vinegar and water.
Maybe that can be another segment or something. A complete step by step explanation
about how constables were the unpaid glue that helped settle this country along with it’s
ancient sister office, the sheriff. A county was huge back then. At one time the entire state of Tennessee was actually part of North Carolina. Tennessee County was a actually a subdivision of the territory of North Carolina that later became the state of Tennessee. So you can imagine the immense territory
the sheriff of Tennessee County had to watch over back then! That is precisely another
valid reason why constables were around. To have law and order in all those segmented
districts and towns within that county. It all was and still remains rather simple. The only
complications are self imposed ones or those imposed upon YOU by some other grown up
adult who thinks he knows more than YOU.
Paid police were never provided for by any constitution whatsoever. Politicians made
police and when politicians mandated that judges had to be lawyers first before they could
be judges then the system slowly grew bigger and bigger. I mean think about it for a
second, especially those few heckling haters out there. Just try to think rational for once
without having your head in an anal probing position of someone you think is smart
because he or she makes lots of money, looks smart by surrounding himself with
incompetence and high school dropouts (remember, I have not mentioned any names for a
change…) and objectively ask yourself this… Why does law mandate:
1) a person must have a law degree in order to practice law
2) a person must have a law degree to be a judge
3) most people who serve in state and federal legislative positions are either lawyers
or connected with real estate or insurance companies. Now why is that?
Now keep your thinking caps on for a few more seconds if you will. Now so far we have
learned that in order to defend a person in court you need a law degree. In order to sit on a
judge’s bench and be a judge you need a law degree. BUT, for you to enforce law, you do
not need a law degree. Heck, I think by reading past articles along with other information
and statistical data on the subject, to enforce law doesn’t require much more than having a
daddy in the right position or a family member, perhaps an uncle, in the right position and
POOF, you get to play the role as “policeman”. Now why is that?
To dig even deeper, YOU have a system of laws and rules that isn’t really fair to you if you
looked at everything fairly and objectively. Think about this…You get arrested and thrown
in jail by a cop who has never had any formal law training. For certain, he sure doesn' t
have, nor is he required to have a law degree. So right off the bat, you are being arrested by
someone paid by YOU (the public) to enforce the law but he basically doesn’t have much
more than a fundamental grasp as to what law is. Someone please explain that one to me. The kicker is YOU pay for this official and ALL his equipment as well. May as well be arrested by a constable because in the very least the constable knows IF he violates your rights HE loses everything he has. No wonder it is hard to find lawsuit cases against a constable in over 150 years of case law.
Next you are placed in a jail and a bail bond is placed upon every single and separate
charge that is stacked against you. See folks, they call that “charge stacking”. If a cop puts
enough charges on you then one or two of them may stick, or the system banks that you
will cut a deal because you simply cannot afford to lose your job, go broke on a lawyer just
trying to prove your innocence. You must PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE and whoever
dreamed up that catchy phrase that “you are innocent until proven guilty” must have had
one toke too many on the happy pipe…In any event, THEY GET YOUR MONEY.
So now you have paid a bail bond on every individual charge in which the local judge
usually has them all preset. I am not going to discuss how preset bonds used by judges in
the state of Tennessee sure appear to be illegal, or in the least sure appears to not be
authorized pursuant to a Tennessee Attorney General opinion.
Now that you are out on bond and are going through the "systematic conveyor belt", you
have a right to a trial by a jury of YOUR PEERS. Okay first I guess we need to define just
what exactly a “peer” is. How about YOU do some research and figure out what a “peer” is.
You can start here...
Well, now that you are sitting at your trial you have a lawyer paid for by the state of
Tennessee there to prosecute and put your butt in jail but the real kicker is, if you cannot
afford a lawyer, then you have a court appointed lawyer paid for by the state of Tennessee
to defend you. So let me see if this “court stuff” is being shown in a light that seems easy
to understand. So far now, you got arrested by a non-lawyer public paid employee fellow in a uniform that may or may not have even a 1.96 Grade Point Average, or is a high school dropout. You have paid a
chunk of money to a private person in the business to make a profit for a bail, that was more than likely preset for any person charged with a similar offense even though the Attorney General says a judge CANNOT preset bail bonds (read that T.A.G.O.
hire a guy with a law degree (remember folks, I know of, and definitely have read of idiots
with all sorts of degrees, even lawyers, doctors and yes judges as well). Then again, you
must remember that IF you cannot afford a lawyer then the state will appoint and pay for a
lawyer to defend you against the lawyer the state pays to lock you away.
So in short, you have been arrested by someone NOT trained in law but is paid by a
government entity. You are in a court where a judge calls all the shots and he is a lawyer in
addition to being paid by a government entity. You have a prosecutor paid by a
government entity to try their very best to get you convicted and then as if this isn’t
enough, you have a lawyer defending you trying to keep you out of jail who is also paid by
the same government entity. Now is this fair? Maybe I am simply too thick headed and
cannot absorb this stuff. But what part of “FAIR” do I not understand when I say, how is it
possible to be fair when a government paid law enforcement officer and when a government
paid judge presides to make things fair, and a government paid attorney to prosecute you,
and a government paid attorney defending you YET the very people sitting over your
judgment is a group of people WHO ARE NOT LAWYERS that have been carefully selected
through what is called a Voir Dire process. Also, in all liklihood, the so called “jury of your
peers” don’t even want to be sitting on jury duty for 5 or 10 bucks a day…
