DJA wrote: > John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > >DJA wrote: > > > >>Or if you are in the military (where you have no Constitutional rights). > > > > > >Have you ever been in the military? > > Does twenty-seven months in the Brown Water Navy count? There and then > you couldn't even reliably count on being covered by the UCMJ.
Yes, it does count. Apparently, you either forgot some key facts are are choosing to ignore them for benefit of rhetoric. > > >Military personnel get to fully enjoy all of their constitutional > >rights. It so happens that military personnel also fall under the > >Uniform Code of Military Justice. > > For the most part, the UCMJ trumps the Constitution. It's the one > court-backed exception to the "Everyone has rights under the > Constitution" rule"[1]. > > It's pretty tough to maintain a standing army when you can't summarily > execute someone without a bunch of paperwork. Heh. There is a bunch of paperwork for such things. There is a bunch of paperwork to remove a part of someone's pay for a couple of months. And you don't get to be executed by NJP. You get to go through a bona fide court martial. Different beast. > >This is also why a lot of seeming infractions that would be enjoy full > >Constitutional Protection fall under NJP, or Non-Judicial Punishment. > >Non Judicial means outside of the (American) legal system. > > Yep. Either you enjoy the rights - or you don't. You do. You forgot what NJP is, apparently. Non-Judicial. Not via the judicial system. There is no innocent. There is no guilty. There is no double jeopardy, because there is no jeopardy in the first place with NJP. > >This is also why an active duty military person can be ``tried'' twice > >for the same crime, notably under-age drinking or DUI. > > Yes, despite that pesky part in the Constitution about double jeopardy. Say you are driving along in your company car and exceeding the speed limit. You get a ticket, and you go to court, and you are found guilty so you end up going to driving school. Your company punishes you for breaking the law be removing your right too drive their cars. Is that double jeopardy? No. Not at all. This is akin to what NJP is. However, the military can do more than just that within the confines of the UCMJ. > >I know it seems to civilians that military personnel have waived or > >suspended their Constitutional rights, but this is a fallacy. > > Lot's of civilians have also waived one or more Constitutional rights, > especially their Fourth Amendment rights. If you had said second amendment, WRT felons, I would say they did not so much give it up as had it taken from them by an action of the courts. You said fourth, having to do with search and seizure. I am not sure what you are talking about, except maybe this war on drugs and war on terror that are more appropriately called the two-front war on civil rights. > Unfortunately, while the electorate has been sleeping on election day, > much of the Constitution's old school ideas of liberty have been > eliminated, or replaced with something more malleable. Yep. Slightly different beast than the going to the police station, and signing a document saying ``I give up right A, B and C.'' > Legal and philosophical theory says rights can't be waived. That's why > they're called rights. The work-around is easy: "Except for you"[2]. > > [2] That's pretty much the definition of "Person of Interest" and > "Detainee". Most (most) are foreign nationals not being held on US soil. Not all. This is still not the ``take a job. relinquish your rights'' type thing. -john -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
