it was a general statement- not specific to this situation and not applicable to this situation as this clown wasn't convicted of at least that felony.
what i'm saying is when we open the door to picking what and how we want to enforce something we open the door to all kinds of issues that makes things far more complicated than it should be.
he was charged with a felony. he bid the court to lessen the charge successfully. he later does something that having that full charge on his record may have made more difficult to do... ---- why do we trump up charges? why do we negotiate a lessor charge? why is there opportunity to change these things?
we support some items within the bill of rights and attack others.. why? either we're free and protected from bad state actors, or we're subjects of rulers... and worse, mob..
why are felons in some locations allowed to vote? if that is on the table, what else is up for debate?
our contract with society is pretty clear and neat- it's complicated by those who live between the letter of the law and the spirit- who we call lawyers... they beg the question when it supports their agenda, and then they stand tall and proclaim the letter of the law when it benefits their cause- all the while, laws and the languages of have exhausted their structure to the best of the drafters ability.... just for some group of robe wearers to come along years after the law was enacted to question what 'those effers really meant"....
" oh what a tangled web we weave......"
and THAT is the crux of it... nothing is irrevocable- nothing is beyond reproach- which describes the paradox... if nothing is irrevocable or disallowed to be brought under scrutiny, are we truly free or are we bound by things that made sense centuries ago but are no longer applicable?
bottom line? if you want your freedom you're gonna have to put up with a bunch of bull shit that threatens your security- if you want security you're going to lose a good part of your freedom.
