Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:26 PM Feb 2013

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 = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clearly, reestablishing Magna Carta is an unrealistic Left Wing goal.... (Original Post) Junkdrawer Feb 2013 OP
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Feb 2013 #1
Pffft. Pre - 9/11 thinking. progressoid Feb 2013 #2
"Jury of your peers" was because the King was letting commoners try nobles Recursion Feb 2013 #3
Good reason to get rid of the whole concept of constraint on the power of the executive, right? MNBrewer Feb 2013 #6
The barons were the original teabaggers Recursion Feb 2013 #7
Indeed, Absolute Monarchy IS to be defended MNBrewer Feb 2013 #9
He was never an absolute monarch like in France Recursion Feb 2013 #12
That makes it all better MNBrewer Feb 2013 #13
The Right to a Jury of One's Peers Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #27
It's the word "peers" we got rid of Recursion Feb 2013 #32
The text of the Magna Carta emphasizes "freeman" and seems to use the word peer... Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #33
It's not peers in the sense of "peers of the realm" Recursion Feb 2013 #35
whooo...zlow down there sport Dragonfli Feb 2013 #4
Voting only Democratic is no assurance of "liberal cred" MNBrewer Feb 2013 #10
No you slow down. You think that voting Democratic assures liberal what? rhett o rick Feb 2013 #15
Too subtle for this crowd. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #17
WHOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSHHHHH! kath Feb 2013 #20
Point taken. Progress is not to be measured from where we are... Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #25
Why elect academic scholar of Constitution? tama Feb 2013 #29
Don't forget keel-hauling. nt awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #5
Keels hadn't been invented yet Recursion Feb 2013 #8
When were they invented?? MNBrewer Feb 2013 #11
They come with the lateen Recursion Feb 2013 #14
You learn something every day. nt awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #22
From his posts you really do. nt Democracyinkind Feb 2013 #26
Let's be international and bring in necklacing. nt OnyxCollie Feb 2013 #16
I had to look that up. I wish I hadn't now. Amimnoch Feb 2013 #28
Small incremental improvements Herlong Feb 2013 #18
This is entirely unrelated Herlong Feb 2013 #19
K&R. Wonderful. JDPriestly Feb 2013 #21
Excellent post. nt awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #24
"Don't even use the word free if you don't have an inalienable right to a trial..." Junkdrawer Feb 2013 #30
epic thread Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #23
Here in the country that gave the world Magna Carta...... T_i_B Feb 2013 #31
We are facing a new type of existential threat, an enemy unlike any foe before... Octafish Feb 2013 #34
^ Wilms Feb 2013 #36

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
3. "Jury of your peers" was because the King was letting commoners try nobles
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:39 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
12. He was never an absolute monarch like in France
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:03 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
27. The Right to a Jury of One's Peers
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:26 AM
Feb 2013
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

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
32. It's the word "peers" we got rid of
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:49 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
33. The text of the Magna Carta emphasizes "freeman" and seems to use the word peer...
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 09:04 AM
Feb 2013

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."

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
35. It's not peers in the sense of "peers of the realm"
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 10:13 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
4. whooo...zlow down there sport
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:49 AM
Feb 2013

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".

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
15. No you slow down. You think that voting Democratic assures liberal what?
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:19 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
25. Point taken. Progress is not to be measured from where we are...
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 07:07 AM
Feb 2013

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.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
8. Keels hadn't been invented yet
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:57 AM
Feb 2013

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

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
14. They come with the lateen
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 01:06 AM
Feb 2013

You don't really need one if you only sail with the wind ("large&quot ; 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.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
21. K&R. Wonderful.
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 02:21 AM
Feb 2013

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".[3] 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",[4] 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.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
30. "Don't even use the word free if you don't have an inalienable right to a trial..."
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:44 AM
Feb 2013

Very, very well put.

T_i_B

(14,738 posts)
31. Here in the country that gave the world Magna Carta......
Fri Feb 8, 2013, 08:48 AM
Feb 2013

.......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.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Clearly, reestablishing M...