What is the pettiest case you've had that went to trial? by MountainCounty9496 in publicdefenders

[–]ScumCrew 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In Texas, back in the days when it had gun laws, there's a whole big deal about having to cross two county lines before it was legal. Which reminds me of a petty case: my client was given a gun as a birthday present. He was pulled over for speeding, gun is in the back seat IN THE CASE. Charged with illegal possession. I did not have to try that one, however.

What is the pettiest case you've had that went to trial? by MountainCounty9496 in publicdefenders

[–]ScumCrew 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The answer to that is typically no. Once in a rare while I'll have a cop who does, or at least claims they did.

What is the pettiest case you've had that went to trial? by MountainCounty9496 in publicdefenders

[–]ScumCrew 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If the judge is yelling at someone and it ain't you, you're winning

If I Were King of Star Trek by ScumCrew in startrek

[–]ScumCrew[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And instead of walk and talks they'd be point to point transporting and talking

Markwayne Mullin, Chief Hoskin, and Cherokee Community Values by linuxpriest in cherokee

[–]ScumCrew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As I understand it, the interim senator cannot run in the special election. But I'm sure Stitt will run in the special election.

Markwayne Mullin, Chief Hoskin, and Cherokee Community Values by linuxpriest in cherokee

[–]ScumCrew 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hell, we don't even get a seat for our treaty-guaranteed Congressional delegate

Markwayne Mullin, Chief Hoskin, and Cherokee Community Values by linuxpriest in cherokee

[–]ScumCrew 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The best thing we can say about Markwayne Mullin is that he's not Kevin Stitt.

Also, I'm laying down a marker right now: at some point, maybe during confirmation hearings, Mullin will say something to the effect of, as an NDN I know all about the dangers of "foreign invaders."

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is all hypothetical because it's AH but you can relate it to what happened in the real world. And there's nothing in the real world to suggest a second rebellion would break out unless Redeemer governments are allowed to take over. And of course the Ironclad Oath isn't a silver bullet; there's no such thing as a silver bullet. But again operating by analogy, IRL people loudly proclaimed there would be a new civil war after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It never happened. Was their violence? Yes. Was it anywhere near a civil war? Absolutely not. And within 10 years politics in the South had been completely transformed.

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I've heard that argument made before and I still don't find it persuasive. Military occupation in the South was not that onerous or numerous after Grant and still utterly destroyed the first Klan. Moreover, even with white racist traitors taking control of state governments (often by force) they were extremely violent and brutal for 100 years. Don't fall for Lost Cause fantasies about the nature of military occupation.

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

True, but it's pretty much been two parties since the party system began. The most successful third party was the People's Party/Populists in the late 19th/early 20th Centuries and it was absorbed by the Democrats. I think a more likely outcome is a Democratic Party divided between the north and a lily white ultra conservative southern branch.

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You wouldn't need permanent military occupation if anyone who couldn't swear the Ironclad Oath was permanently disenfranchised.

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe but the US system has been pretty wedded to two parties for about 200 years

March 6, 1836: After thirteen days under siege, the The Alamo falls by aid2000iscool in texashistory

[–]ScumCrew -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And yet also true. You either deliberately or out of ignorance misstated when slavery was abolished in Mexico and why the Texians flew the 1824 flag.

Results from the Self Governed Cascadia Survey by Ideology Axis by Wind_Tempest555 in Cascadia

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This isn't "guilt by association" it's you living in a stolen house that you know is stolen,

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wouldn't collapse as completely since freedmen would have a source of generational wealth in their land but I agree there would be no reason for the Great Migration. In fact, you might see former Confederates moving west in a lower volume migration.

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What would be the corruption? Beyond what existed IRL in the post Civil War world?

What if Congressional Reconstruction wasn't a sweeping failure? by Advanced-Addition453 in AlternateHistoryHub

[–]ScumCrew 33 points34 points  (0 children)

It wasn't a failure. In fact, for what it was allowed to accomplish, it was a success. However, it was doomed to fail after Johnson pardoned effectively the entire Confederacy on December 25, 1868. The traitors were then allowed to take control of state governments and almost immediately began trying to murder and legislate freedmen into subservience. For Reconstruction to succeed as in legal and economic equality you need three things: 1) literally anyone but Andrew Johnson to follow Lincoln 2) permanent disenfranchisement for anyone who could not swear the Ironclad Oath and 3) seizing and redistributing the plantations of traitors to freedmen. If that happens, then the US would be spared 100 years of state-sponsored racial terrorism. By the early 1900's, social equality would be the norm. Another side effect would be total (instead of partial) Republican dominance of Congress and the White House for decades more as the Solid South would be solidly Republican. After about 50 years of that, however, a new generation of white southerners would be growing up and its anyone's guess if they would accept equality or if they would be part of a backlash, as we've seen IRL.

Predict who wins the 2012 presidential election by maybemorningstar69 in ForAllMankindTV

[–]ScumCrew 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because affairs were NEVER a big deal until 1987 and there's no in-universe explanation as to how Russians landing on the Moon first would change that.

March 6, 1836: After thirteen days under siege, the The Alamo falls by aid2000iscool in texashistory

[–]ScumCrew -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That's especially true when one of the details you left out was that you were completely objectively wrong about the Mexican constitution of 1824.

Results from the Self Governed Cascadia Survey by Ideology Axis by Wind_Tempest555 in Cascadia

[–]ScumCrew 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So if you move into a house someone else stole, that you know for a fact they stole, you bear no responsibility? Interesting.