Pseudolaw has dual meaning, like many other plastic words and phrases in the gang stalking dialectic. For my purposes, it means this here, and you can reference the types of people who push pseudolaw here, as we see a few old white women equating domestic violence with “torture” and so on–these same types of women entirely silent about ACTUAL torture, as we saw during the Iraq war, and its aftermath, at Guantanamo Bay Cuba.
These pseudolaw pushers are a threat to democracies everywhere and anywhere a democracy exists.
So, lets take a look at Marsy’s Law, from the standpoint of a police officer turned state senator from Kentucky. And as usual, my readers will note that I am no fan of the police, or a fan of Republican’s generally–but that like this article suggests, politics make strange bed fellows.
I ask–who is it exactly that writes these horrible anti-democratic laws into law and policy?
From the Kentucky Courier-Journal:
Opinion: What do the ACLU and the Tea Party agree on? Marsy’s Law is bad for Kentucky
It’s not often that you see an ACLU attorney, a Republican senator, a commonwealth attorney and members of the Tea Party agreeing on something. This may be a first in Kentucky history, but we all agree that Marsy’s Law is bad for victims and wrong for Kentucky.
A movement that has been sweeping the nation, backed by millions of out-of-state dollars, is rearing its head again in the commonwealth. Marsy’s Law seeks to amend our state’s Constitution to create an entirely new set of “rights” and standing for victims or survivors of alleged criminal activity.
But the bill promises to do so without any detail, funding resources or direction.
Indeed–a bill that asks for billions, just like the Violence Against Women Act did back in 1993. Sure, says the Federal Reserve, we can just print more money! Cool!
Never mind that no one anywhere can clearly articulate where all that extra printed money has value, beyond “cuz we said so!”
But far more troubling with these laws, is the fact that they directly compete with EXISTING LAWS and seek to over ride those laws, by inserting themselves into the the Constitution!–these pseudo laws are in every way designed to bankrupt democracies, and over ride law. And it’s not just me asking that.
And these laws are written in a combination of ordinary language and coded speech too–a for of psychobabble similar to how some equate domestic violence with Abu Ghraib:
Marsy’s Law uses inconsistent and confusing language that would be at odds with Kentuckians’ constitutional rights and create significant unintended consequences. Some of the state’s top legal minds cannot even untangle the contradictory language in Marsy’s Law.
And he notes that “Once when analyzing the legislation, one Kentucky Supreme Court Justice simply remarked: “I don’t know what this means.” One thing Marsy’s Law does is explicitly deny victims a path to seek legal remedies for violations of their rights.
Hmmm. Getting interesting, huh? I DO know what it means–do you?
These pseudo-laws, beyond being a threat to democracy, are in fact a threat to humanity–they suggest a world without human made law! Or worse–a world under a religious-corporate hegemony of one kind or another.
Many people are afraid to publicly be against Marsy’s Law because of the fear of being perceived to be against victims’ rights. This could not be further from the truth. This amendment will be bad for our criminal justice system. It will inhibit the ability to get to the truth. Its effect will be to further burden, muddy and confuse an already overwhelmed system, which will hurt victims and defendants alike.
Go over there and read that article–a very good analyses of pseudo law, asking the question “are these laws designed to replace our Constitution?”
….follow the links….connect the dots!