cinepro Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Calm said: I don't know whether you missed it or are ignoring it, but the problem with the Expositor was it was inciting violence more than exposing anything. Why does the physical violence only need to be against the Prophet/Mayor for the City Council to take action? On top of that, calling to repeal the Charter so that the city/Mormons would lose their main form of self defense, the Nauvoo Legion...highly incendiary for the community. Quoted before But there's also this... Quote The question is asked, will you bring a mob upon us? In answer to that, we assure all concerned, that we will be among the first to put down anything like an illegal force being used against any man or set of men. If any one has become amenable to the law, we wish to have him tried impartially by the laws of his country. We are among the number who believe that there is virtue and integrity enough in the administrators of the law, to bring every offender to justice, and to protect the innocent. If it is necessary to make a show of force, to execute legal process, it will [create] no sympathy in that case to cry out, we are mobbed. Nauvoo Expositor Edited July 1, 2018 by cinepro 4
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 31 minutes ago, ALarson said: Julie has posted quite a few quotes where there are listed what laws may have been broken. (Maybe you missed those?) I just believe it was criminal activity....nothing will change my mind regarding that. I haven't actually researched statutes in force in Nauvoo at that time (nor have I claimed those were broken). I'll try to do that if I get a chance over the next few days, but I'm out of here now for church. Julie has cited bupkis. Criminally speaking. She backed off the hyperbolic claims of criminality. You continue to make the claim of criminality. Support it or withdraw it. 1
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 1 hour ago, USU78 said: Who precisely in this thread has celebrated or defended the probably extra legal extent of at least part of the abatement? I'd appreciate citations. That's a CFR, BTW. I don't know where I wrote that! I'm not even sure what you mean (can you clarify? thanks). Here are some posts where I did find information about this: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831737 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831709 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831731 Who wrote the statutes for Nauvoo, do you know? Either way, I do believe there are good points for this being criminal on both sides of the debate. But, I'd really like to know who actually wrote the statutes you keep referring to. Also, I believe there were state laws and federal laws to consider (not just the Nauvoo statutes), Some of those are discussed in the info and links above. Gotta get back to SM now (I was in between meetings on here).
JLHPROF Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 1 hour ago, USU78 said: Julie has cited bupkis. Criminally speaking. She backed off the hyperbolic claims of criminality. You continue to make the claim of criminality. Support it or withdraw it. Again, does it matter? Laws aren't always right. And obedience to incorrect laws is not a trait to admire any more than disobedience to righteous laws would be. I don't see that Joseph did anything wrong. Therefore whether a law was broken doesn't matter to me.
strappinglad Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 Apparently , in Joseph's day mobs were formed at the drop of a hat and all kinds of destruction would take place. We live in a much more enlightened time and such would never happen now.We just deal with Twitter Storms.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 1, 2018 Author Posted July 1, 2018 1 minute ago, strappinglad said: Apparently , in Joseph's day mobs were formed at the drop of a hat and all kinds of destruction would take place. We live in a much more enlightened time and such would never happen now.We just deal with Twitter Storms. Maxine Waters is calling for mobs to intimidate cabinet members at their homes, department stores, gas stations, etc. The woman should be censured. 1
Jeanne Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: Maxine Waters is calling for mobs to intimidate cabinet members at their homes, department stores, gas stations, etc. The woman should be censured. She has rights...but I don't agree with her way of doing things..in fact..I am appalled! But that is another story...carry on. Edited July 1, 2018 by Jeanne
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 2 hours ago, JulieM said: I don't know where I wrote that! I'm not even sure what you mean (can you clarify? thanks). Here are some posts where I did find information about this: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831737 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831709 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831731 Who wrote the statutes for Nauvoo, do you know? Either way, I do believe there are good points for this being criminal on both sides of the debate. But, I'd really like to know who actually wrote the statutes you keep referring to. Also, I believe there were state laws and federal laws to consider (not just the Nauvoo statutes), Some of those are discussed in the info and links above. Gotta get back to SM now (I was in between meetings on here). Legislative bodies pass criminal statutes. City councils pass criminal statutes. No such statutes were successfully brought into play wrt the Expositor affair. There. Was. No. Crime. 1
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 2 hours ago, JulieM said: I don't know where I wrote that! I'm not even sure what you mean (can you clarify? thanks). Here are some posts where I did find information about this: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831737 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831709 http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70714-he-lived-great-and-he-died-great/?do=findComment&comment=1209831731 Who wrote the statutes for Nauvoo, do you know? Either way, I do believe there are good points for this being criminal on both sides of the debate. But, I'd really like to know who actually wrote the statutes you keep referring to. Also, I believe there were state laws and federal laws to consider (not just the Nauvoo statutes), Some of those are discussed in the info and links above. Gotta get back to SM now (I was in between meetings on here). You claimed it in the post I had responded to.
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: Again, does it matter? Laws aren't always right. And obedience to incorrect laws is not a trait to admire any more than disobedience to righteous laws would be. I don't see that Joseph did anything wrong. Therefore whether a law was broken doesn't matter to me. It matters to the ones attempting to control the narrative. If JSJr and the council are seen as well intended screwups under horrific pressure, they are sympathetic characters in whom one might trust. If, otoh, they are self-seeking tyrants oppressing others by criminal means, then they can safely and forever be placed in the villain category, and nobody need seriously engage anything they said. It makes a difference.
Calm Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 3 hours ago, cinepro said: But there's also this... I agree it is ambiguous. But given the atmosphere at the time and the Saints’ history, any justification for mob violence is way too much, imo.
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, USU78 said: You claimed it in the post I had responded to. Can you link to the post you’re referring to? Thanks! I can spend more time on this tomorrow. Also, can you tell me who wrote the statutes you’re referencing? (Nauvoo statutes)? Edited July 1, 2018 by JulieM
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 1 minute ago, JulieM said: Can you link to the post you’re referring to? Thanks! I can spend more time in this tomorrow. Also, can you tell me who wrote the statutes you’re referencing? (Nauvoo statutes)? Those would be the Illinois statutes in force in 1844.
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) Everyone who hasn’t, should read the words of William Law (if they want to hear from both sides on this issue). Here is a fascinated interview years later: http://www.william-law.org/publications/the-mormons-in-nauvoo-three-letters-from-william-law-on-mormonism-an-honest-mans-view-and-remorse-the-daily-tribune-salt-lake-city-july-3-1887 Edited July 1, 2018 by JulieM 1
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, USU78 said: Those would be the Illinois statutes in force in 1844. Thanks USU, can you link to my post where I need to supply references? Thanks! Also, can you please respond with an answer to who wrote the statues you’re referring to from Nauvoo? I've asked you this several times now. Who wrote them? Edited July 1, 2018 by JulieM
Calm Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 I believe USU is referring to this comment: ”Scott, I think it’s ironic that you are defending this type of violence and the destruction of someone’s business and property.“ He is asking you to point out where Scott or anyone else has defended (or celebrated) the extralegal destruction, I believe. He can correct me if I have misread him. 1
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 13 minutes ago, JulieM said: Thanks USU, can you link to my post where I need to supply references? Thanks! Also, can you please respond with an answer to who wrote the statues you’re referring to from Nauvoo? I've asked you this several times now. Who wrote them? The city ordinances are not at issue. Accordingly, who the draftsman was isn't relevant. It's the state criminal code you should be focused on. I cited your post in full. Just scroll up.
USU78 Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 13 minutes ago, Calm said: I believe USU is referring to this comment: ”Scott, I think it’s ironic that you are defending this type of violence and the destruction of someone’s business and property.“ He is asking you to point out where Scott or anyone else has defended (or celebrated) the extralegal destruction, I believe. He can correct me if I have misread him. Yup.
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, Calm said: I believe USU is referring to this comment: ”Scott, I think it’s ironic that you are defending this type of violence and the destruction of someone’s business and property.“ He is asking you to point out where Scott or anyone else has defended (or celebrated) the extralegal destruction, I believe. He can correct me if I have misread him. Ok. I do still wonder about that. I understand that emotions were running high, but the violence and destruction that took place is hard to understand. Thanks, Calm.
JulieM Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 Who wrote the Nauvoo statutes that USU keeps asking about? That would be good to know here! I’m off of here until tomorrow; but will check back in. Thanks to anyone who can answer!
USU78 Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 3 minutes ago, JulieM said: Who wrote the Nauvoo statutes that USU keeps asking about? That would be good to know here! I’m off of here until tomorrow; but will check back in. Thanks to anyone who can answer! It is the STATE of ILLINOIS not the City of Nauvoo statutes that are at issue.
JulieM Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, USU78 said: It is the STATE of ILLINOIS not the City of Nauvoo statutes that are at issue. Then why do you keep asking which of them were broken (related to criminal activity)? Why won’t you answer the question? Who wrote the statutes you keep referring to? (The Nauvoo statures). (I’ll check back in tomorrow. Signing off now!) Edited July 2, 2018 by JulieM
USU78 Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 4 minutes ago, JulieM said: Then why do you keep asking which of them were broken (related to criminal activity)? Why won’t you answer the question? Who wrote the statutes you keep referring to? (The Nauvoo statures). (I’ll check back in tomorrow. Signing off now!) State criminal laws are the issue. What ILLINOIS state CRIMINAL statute in force in 1844 was relied upon by the arresting officers and jailers in 1844 to arrest and hold Joseph and Hyrum. Let's start there.
Calm Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, JulieM said: Then why do you keep asking which of them were broken (related to criminal activity)? Why won’t you answer the question? Who wrote the statutes you keep referring to? (The Nauvoo statures). (I’ll check back in tomorrow. Signing off now!) State criminal laws would have been written by the state legislature. They would have been in force in Nauvoo just as in the rest of the state. I believe the city charter gave certain powers of government , such as creating the Nauvoo Legion, but it wouldn't change criminal law as far as I know. Edited July 2, 2018 by Calm
Recommended Posts