Supreme Court? - We Don't Need No Stink'n Supreme Court!

May 16, 2007

Hello, Folks!

Mark Sherman, of the Associated Press, reported on May 1, 2007 on the outcome of a case from Atlanta, Georgia, where a Coweta County sheriff's deputy, Timothy Scott chased a Georgia teenager driving a Cadillac on a rain-slicked two lane road at 90 miles per hour. Scott rammed the Cadillac and the result is that the teenage will be paralyzed for life.

The nine black-robed imposters on the court said that "A police officer's attempt to terminate a dangerous high-speed car chase that threatens the lives of innocent bystanders does not violate the Fourth Amendment, even when it places the fleeing motorist at risk of serious injury or death." So says Justice Antonin Scalia and seven of his fellow so-called judges.

Wait a minute here folks. Let us consider further the implications of this decision.

In the first place, the gun-tote'n testosterone supercharged Scott was chasing the teenager for a minor traffic infraction, and not some heinous crime. Further, if he had broken off the chase, the Cadillac would not have been going 90 mph, nor would the youngster be paralyzed for life.

This kind of one-sided, police oriented decsion making by the Supremes is, in my opinion, outrageous. They have just given the police a license to kill whomever they choose using death by auto, on the most minor pf pretexts, or, for that matter, given the police propensity for perjury and making up excuses for their misconduct, no reason at all.

Along with this obnoxious decision, the Supremes also made it more difficult for American's to contest IRS levies for back taxes, and we all know how honest and fair the IRS is when they create these so-called back tax levies.

Don't you think you should join the No Vote Party today and help rid America of this type of oppressive legalistic tyranny>

D. Tom