Val Kilmer ACLU and the Law

John Trudell said in an interview with Living Life…Boomer Style Magazine, “There are five types of law: common, criminal, constitutional, and treaty. Of all these laws, treaty is the only one they [United States government] dropped the word law from. We were saying then, through political action, America has a legal responsibility–one of laws. What I found out? America is a nation of rules–not laws. They are just pretending it is law; laws imply just. In America, there are no laws, only rules.”

Ever since hearing Trudell’s words, it got me thinking, is what Trudell is saying true? He is a straight shooter, a smart man, and not one to aggrandize, exaggerate or deceive. My experience? Found out Trudell’s words are true.

When it comes to the police being called to a domestic dispute or a disruption of the peace or even a car accident where someone was speeding or went through a red light, for example, which caused the accident, that person may or may not get a ticket for their actions.

Regarding the car accident, one police officer said they didn’t give the speeder a ticket because when they got to the accident the eye witnesses weren’t there. Yet, they knew by measuring the tire tracks how fast the car was going. Later when the eye witnesses corroborated the accident was caused by a speeder going through a red light, still no tickets were issued to the driver. Why? Police said then, it was because the driver was at home.

Is it Interpretation of the Law or is it Based on Rules

Upon being called to a domestic disturbance, one officer wants to arrest the woman who was assaulted because she left scratch marks on the man’s face, another wants to arrest the man for pushing her down the stairs–which the man claimed was an accident. Whether or not someone is arrested or charged with a crime depends on the emotions of the police officers–not so much on the law. The officers had conflicting ‘points of view,’ but which is based on the law and which is based on the interpretation of the law by our law-makers and/or our police?

The police left and let both parties stay in the house because based on ‘rule of thumb’ for the first domestic dispute call to a home, if the parties have calmed down and everything seems okay, the police will give the couple a verbal warning.

A Few More Examples

We have a clear definition regarding illegal aliens in our laws, which are black and white (no racial pun intended); yet our government is usurping the state’s sovereignty by suing Arizona for a law which is also a federal law. Crazy; up is down, down is up.

How about something as straight forward as a president being vetted before he can accept a nomination to run for the presidential office? Apparently, this is no longer a law and simply one run on emotion/rules based on how much you like someone or don’t like someone. These statements are not for or against illegal entry to our country or our president, just looking at the facts.

This list could go on and on and on regarding Trudell’s experience of America being a nation of laws or rules. But, the last example will be Eric Holder–who is to be the ‘head law supporter’ in our country, since he is the current attorney general. Why is he dismissing so many cases against terrorists as well as the men who were physically intimidating to voters during the presidential election? The American public has been given no explanation for these dismissals. Holder did not take the law-breakers to task.

The fourth pillar (media) who are endowed with the privilage of being the watch dogs to people and establishments in power are quiet on these matters, also, which leads us to believe the media are agreeable to rules and not laws, too.

Val Kilmer and His Permit Issue

While this may not seem important and to my shock is the very first time in years and years the ACLU is representing something we agree upon, Val Kilmer receiving his zoning permits based on the law of the his township is important.

According to The Santa Fe New Mexican newspaper Kilmer was given permission for the zoning of his ranch to become a bed and breakfast place, but after people started bringing up past statements he supposedly said in magazine interviews from a few years ago, the permits were revoked. Either it is in the zoning laws that he can have a bed and breakfast or it isn’t. Can’t be one or the other. Unless the zoning laws have something regarding free speech in them, it should be very clear if his ranch would qualify or not.

If we let this go by, be very careful, it could happen to you. Let’s say you live in California, where you have to get a permit to replace your water heater. Yes, you read that correctly, to replace a water heater you have to get a permit.

What if your water heater went out and you received a permit. You go home and think, ahhhh, tonight will be celebrated with a nice warm shower. Your heater is almost installed and a person from the zoning board comes in and says your permit is revoked. Why you ask? The zoning board has revoked it because five years ago a local reporter asked your opinion about the Farmer’s Market shutting down the streets in their town five hours before the market started. You said it was a bit absurd to close down that early. Now, the reporter under deadline was writing fast and went on to get two other opinions. Your quote got tangled up with some one else’s and ended up like this:

The newspaper recount said you said, “It is absurd to close down five hours early, if they had some workers doing this who could speak English, it may not take them as long to get set-up.”

You then called the paper and told them you were quoted incorrectly.  They said the reporter checked their notes and that’s what they have written down, so it has to stay that way.

Yet, in matters of the law, does it matter if he was misquoted or not?  Laws are black and white, they are to be fair and just–no matter who you are, the color of your skin, no matter what your beliefs are, no matter what your social standing, the law is the law is the law…but it seems the United States of America has forgotten about the law.  The decisions from our head honcho on down have decided it depends on if you are conservative, liberal, an illegal alien, black, white, Indian, rich or poor, a corporation or an individual–if the powers that be can vilify you, then be careful, for the law will not be applied to you.

Well, this is what Kilmer is up against.  Readers, what are your thoughts on this?  Does what you say–whether you are quoted correctly or not–matter when it comes to laws?  Are punitive actions warranted or not?

Email Us and we will post your opinions.

UPDATE:  Wednesday, June 22, 2010 Kilmer went in front of the Santa Fe City Council zoning meeting and spoke.  They did give him back the permits, see the video of Val Kilmer at the San Miguel commission meeting.

 

 

Tagged ACLU, Val Kilmer