- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anyone have any experience with jury duty or missing it?
Posted on 9/13/25 at 9:47 pm to Obtuse1
Posted on 9/13/25 at 9:47 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
If you don't show up and participate in good faith, never complain about the legal system. It is like voting if you don't exercise your right don't complain you get saddled with elected officials you don't like because you couldn't be bothered to do your small part.
I get what you are saying, but the right to a jury trial by conscripting citizens against their will to sit on a jury is a violation of the liberty of the jury members. You're fulfilling one right by violating 12 others.
We need professional jurors who are there because they choose to be.
2
Posted on 9/13/25 at 9:52 pm to LSUbacchus81
If you have a valid reason to gain an exemption......give it. If not, show the hell up and do your civic duty.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 9:53 pm to LSUbacchus81
I haven’t voted since 2008 but still get pulled. Made sure not to register last time I moved.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 10:22 pm to VooDude
quote:
How about those with real jobs?
Those with real jobs work for companies have policies to handle jury duty or they use PTO. Those with real jobs are also capable/willing to make sacrifices in order to live in the greatest country the world has ever known.
Come to think of it. You're absolutely right we should abolish the 6th and 7th amendments because jury duty is too inconvenient for its citizens especially those with real jobs. It worked so great for the colonists prior to 1776.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 10:29 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
We need professional jurors who are there because they choose to be.
Then you have jurors who are beholden to the government. This is exactly why we have the current jury system. Its been a great system for almost 250 years. However, according to you. we should change it now because the current citizens are too complacent and apathetic to make any sacrifices or willingness to participate in the system that protects the freedoms that we take for granted.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 10:47 pm to STLDawg
quote:
I haven’t voted since 2008 but still get pulled. Made sure not to register last time I moved.
They pull from multiple sources, not just voter logs. I know because the first time I was called I wasn't registered to vote. They use driver's licenses and such, too.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 10:53 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
You're fulfilling one right by violating 12 others.
Make the Constitutional argument. While you are at it explain how they can't draft people into the military and can't require me to provide my professional services to other people for free.
Also, please explain why you are so keen on giving government employees complete control of every civil and criminal outcome in the US court system.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 11:53 pm to armytiger96
quote:
Then you have jurors who are beholden to the government.
Admittedly, that's the best argument against it. However, if done correctly, which means with a high degree of transparency and accountability, irregularities could be easily detected. Right now we have a recognized problem with citizen juries in which black juries don't want to convict black defendants. The stats show this. With professional juries you could track outcomes like that and conflicts of interest would be much easier to uncover.
But I will grant you that you have named the biggest downside/problem with the idea.
quote:
Its been a great system for almost 250 years.
This I disagree with. If you think this, I doubt you've ever sat on an actual jury. Our legal system is only about who has the best lawyer that can put on the best show. Which usually means the most expensive lawyer. Which means that rich people get a different level of "justice" than poor people.
I think professional jurors would quickly get wise to the lawyer tricks that dazzle amateur jurors and lawyers would have to stop performing so much and argue the law.
Also, you could require an associate's degree level of education to be a juror in which jurors became familiar with legal terms concepts, etc. so that they would be better able to render accurate decisions.
quote:
However, according to you. we should change it now because the current citizens are too complacent and apathetic to make any sacrifices or willingness to participate in the system that protects the freedoms that we take for granted.
And now you are lying. I didn't say that at all. Do you want to discuss this in good faith or not?
This post was edited on 9/14/25 at 12:26 am
Posted on 9/14/25 at 12:11 am to Obtuse1
quote:
Make the Constitutional argument.
Inalienable rights.
I don't believe that anything that requires someone else to provide it involuntarily can actually be an inalienable right. Which is why i don't believe that health care, for example, can be an inalienable right.
And I'm not arguing from the Constitution, I'm arguing that I think the FF got this part wrong based on structuring the Constitution on inalienable rights, yet violating that very principle on this point.
In my natural state, existing by myself in the woods, I have the right to defend myself and no one has the right to deprive me of what I need to do so. I have the right to speak, the right to privacy, etc. I do NOT have the natural right—if I have a grievance with my neighbor—to grab another neighbor and sequester him and force him or her to listen to the dispute for days or weeks and render a decision on it.
quote:
how they can't draft people into the military
That was decided in court cases, wasn't it? All the Constitution provides for is Congress "raising armies," right? It doesn't say, "raising armies by forcing citizens to enlist." That was something the court decided. Selective draft law of 1918, I think.
That one is being enforced unconstitutionally as we speak IMO. Because although women serve in the military, they are NOT required to register for selective service like men, which is a direct violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Men and women are being treated differently under the law based on an immutable characteristic, seems to me.
quote:
and can't require me to provide my professional services to other people for free.
You'd have to be more specific about what you mean here for me to answer that one.
quote:
please explain why you are so keen on giving government employees complete control of every civil and criminal outcome in the US court system.
Because of what I have already typed above. I think there is a way to mitigate the worst features of a professional jury system and the benefits would outweigh the negatives.
This post was edited on 9/14/25 at 12:21 am
Posted on 9/14/25 at 12:31 am to wackatimesthree
Last time I got called in for JD the judge did her whole speal about how important it was to the system for us to be there. The case was a local weathly family's blacksheep sibling who was suing himself and his siblings because he fell through the ceiling of one of their businesses and hurt his back.
100+ people wasting their days because of some dumbass looking for a payday. Of course it was important to the judge and lawyers because its their world and employment. No one else gives a frick.
The system is broken.
Its wild to expect someone to plan their month around a date to call in for the 30% chance they will actually need to come in the next day.
Next summons I get is going in the trash because it looks like junk mail anyway.
100+ people wasting their days because of some dumbass looking for a payday. Of course it was important to the judge and lawyers because its their world and employment. No one else gives a frick.
The system is broken.
Its wild to expect someone to plan their month around a date to call in for the 30% chance they will actually need to come in the next day.
Next summons I get is going in the trash because it looks like junk mail anyway.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 1:25 am to TigerintheNO
quote:Going to say this here- in East Baton Rouge Parish, they send the mail, and they also appear to have emails on record and send you an email. Both me and my son received the email notification a month before the summons arrived this year.
My coworker in Orleans Parish pointed out they don't send it registered mail, as soon as you get don't open it/don't call, just throw it in the trash.
You never received it.
Said since Katrina he's done it 4 times, no one calls nothing happens.
In a situation like that, I'd kind of expect there to be some effort to enforce it. And for what it's worth, we were both dismissed first day.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 9:20 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
quote: However, according to you. we should change it now because the current citizens are too complacent and apathetic to make any sacrifices or willingness to participate in the system that protects the freedoms that we take for granted.
And now you are lying. I didn't say that at all. Do you want to discuss this in good faith or not?
Sorry, instead of "YOU", I should have said this board, I associated your ideas with the comments in four pages of this thread and multitude of other threads on this subject about "how do I get out of jury duty because it's inconvenient" instead of how can we improve our current system?
quote:
This I disagree with. If you think this, I doubt you've ever sat on an actual jury. Our legal system is only about who has the best lawyer that can put on the best show. Which usually means the most expensive lawyer. Which means that rich people get a different level of "justice" than poor people.
You are correct. Despite having been summonsed to jury duty 5-6 times over the past 30 years, I have not sat on a jury and likely will never get a chance due to my level of education and and professional experience. Hell I've never made it out of the big room. The closest I have come to getting on a jury was last year when we went upstairs for selection but they settled/accepted a plea right before jury selection.
My wife served as an alternate a few months ago and said it was a fascinating experience. I hope to get selected one day.
You have some good ideas. I'm not sure they would work in principle, but you never know until you try.
Posted on 9/14/25 at 12:06 pm to armytiger96
quote:
You have some good ideas. I'm not sure they would work in principle, but you never know until you try.
I appreciate that.
I don't know whether they would ultimately prove to be an improvement—and I do acknowledge that the criticism that now there's no hedge against the government with a professional jury is a valid one—but I would at least like to consider them seriously.
Because the system we have has flaws. The one I posted above, plus the lack of judicial review. Judges aren't nearly accountable enough for the random crap they seem to regularly pull IMO.
Professional juries wouldn't work with no oversight either. So a cornerstone of the idea would have to be a lot more oversight and accountability...but like I said, we already sorely need that for judges.
That increased oversight would become the hedge against government in my idea. It would still likely be a government agency, but it could be a checks and balances system like the overall government.
This post was edited on 9/14/25 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 9/14/25 at 12:14 pm to Turnblad85
quote:
Last time I got called in for JD the judge did her whole speal about how important it was to the system for us to be there. The case was a local weathly family's blacksheep sibling who was suing himself and his siblings because he fell through the ceiling of one of their businesses and hurt his back.
100+ people wasting their days because of some dumbass looking for a payday. Of course it was important to the judge and lawyers because its their world and employment. No one else gives a frick.
The system is broken.
Its wild to expect someone to plan their month around a date to call in for the 30% chance they will actually need to come in the next day.
Next summons I get is going in the trash because it looks like junk mail anyway.
Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for people to ignore summons or anything. If I got a jury summons tomorrow I would honor it and serve if chosen, because that is our current system.
I'm not coming at this from the standpoint of obeying only if I think I can't get away with not obeying.
However, I do think the system is flawed and could be improved upon.
I have no animosity toward those who disagreed with me above because I think they are right about at least one thing (and maybe more than one).
Society has reached a point at which the average person no longer considers his or her obligations to society or the system or other people. All we tend to consider is our rights and privileges. What we are owed, not what we are obligated to do or give.
I'll agree that our government/system is largely responsible for us having reached that place, but it's still not a good place for us to be.
We're becoming a nation of people who reflect this in small things like not returning carts to their proper place after using them all the way up to big things like criminally taking advantage of other people.
This post was edited on 9/14/25 at 12:20 pm
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News