Judge Lefkow: My Family Lost Its Safety

[HankB]

She also said that legislation is needed to help keep personal information of judges and other public officials off the Internet unless written consent is given.

Well, I'm neither a judge nor a public official, so it's clear she has no intent to extend these protections to me. I suppose in her warped little mind John Q. Public shouldn't have the same right to privacy that she advocates for herself and other government employees.

I find this attitude - odious.

Make no mistake, I regard the murder of the judge's family members as a very serious crime, and judges ought to be protected from murderers . . . as should everyone else whether they work for the government or not!!!

 

[hso]

I'm going to take a minority postion here. I do not think that judges should receive protection from the nonspecific threats that the average citizen faces from crime, but I do think that it is reasonable for a federal judge to receive protection that the average citizen does not. The reason being that their job puts them and their family at risk of violence from individuals and groups reacting to their judicial decisions. This is job related and because they leave the courthouse the risk doesn't go away.

 

[DonP]

How about cops too?

"The reason being that their job puts them and their family at risk of violence from individuals and groups reacting to their judicial decisions."

Every cop in Chicago faces the same threat from gang bangers they arrest or testify against too. So do the civilian (unarmed in Chicago of course) witnesses that sit on the stand, state their name and give their home address in court while gang members dutifully record the information in the back of the court. It happens at every high profile gang related trial and it intimidates witnesses because the gang members aren't worried about gun laws or any other laws either.

The hard part is deciding who is in more danger from retribution. the judge, the witnesses or the cops. Of all three, guess who isn't allowed to carry a weapon for self or home defensein Cook County?

I don't think anyuone is saying judges shouldn't be protected "on the job" but in their private life they are regular citizens that have to make their own decisions about their family's security, just like the rest of us. Judge Lefkow had a lot more disposable income to spend on an alarm system than most of the people in Chicago.

I'm sorry for her losses, but she is exhibiting signs of elitism in a very clear way.

 

[Logistics]

>>>I'm sorry for her losses, but she is exhibiting signs of elitism in a very clear way.<<<

Of course......don't you know.....her life and her familes lives are worth more than ours...You should know that by now.

Payback will be a bitch someday...

:banghead:

 

[Arc-Lite]

Say what you will... anyone who choses or is placed in the position, of attempting to do honorable work for the public, deserves our protection...even if my personal beliefs are not addressed each time they make a decision, hey, the world does not revolve around me...OR you !!! It does not take much, to figure some public servants deserve more protection, in todays world...of just a questionable look ended in a fire fight... and this is just durning your 5 minute trip to the store.... some peole deal with this type of scum dog, every day... so would it be called elite protection...or the reality of that particular job? Some how, the current popular belief, is that the ones attempting to make change and a positive difference in the world...are the bad guys....and the scum bags are heros....even if I do not belive someone made the right call, does not mean, this person does not believe in the good of the many, to the good of the few. If you feel, that having a different opinion, or life style...or what ever, should result in that person or that persons families death... then just consider the fact....WE ALL, would be living in bunkers...ALONE. I don't care what you do for a living, that is not the question, we ALL are responsible for our own security.....and some are deserving of all of our protection, I am of the old school, if your out there doing your best to do good, for all.. even if, it does not fit my personal agenda ... I will help, in every way I can... call it what you will, I know some call it honor.

 

[Boats]

"I'd like to buy a paragraph Pat."

Jeez. No one is defending the scum bag who murdered those two folks at Judge Lefkow's place. No one.

That does not mean we can't take issue with her melodramatic editorializing to the press. After all, facts remain facts, even in Chicagoland.

1) Lefkow lives in a gun banning political subdivision.
2) Lefkow can afford her own security system.
3) Lefkow's stalker ignored the ineffective gun ban and non-existent home security.
4) Lefkow is whining about motivations for the crime (judicial rhetoric) with no demonstration that it applies to her case.
5) Lefkow argues for even more outsourcing of her non-existent security.
6) Lefkow continues to not get it.
7) Lefkow wants measures taken for her that would not be contemplated, let alone taken, for the typical witness in a criminal case.
8) Lefkow sees nothing wrong or at least ironic about how she should be protected, (on our tab), to a greater degree than a domestic violence victim who appears before her is afforded. Think the cops or Marshals are going to South Chicago and offering security primers to battered mothers on the run?
9) Lefkow is self-important but takes no self-responsibility.
10) Lefkow is a typical liberal.

That's what people are commenting on in this thread.

 

[2nd Amendment]

...nonspecific threats that the average citizen faces from crime...

Herzoner IS an "average citizen" with no more rights or privileges than anyone else. This is VERY important to remember. As such she has no right to public supplied security not only because you and I don't have it but also because providing such further establishes the "Us vs Them" mentality that we need to stop now.

...anyone who choses or is placed in the position, of attempting to do honorable work for the public, deserves our protection

To the exact same level you or I get protection. This means the police(whose job has nothing to do with protection) or ourselves(whom people like Hersoner have helped to render defenseless. If she feels she should not have to live like this then let her take up the cause and do something about it, not demand that she is somehow special above the rest of us.

 

[Arc-Lite]

Boats...I agree, she did fail to take the proper steps for her security, as well as her family... and she did pay the price, for that choice..the death of her family. I am sure there comes a time after going threw something as that, that you do change..how could it be any other way...? her words are no longer theory, but body numbing experience. I have no doubt, if you personally saw a lady being beaten, you would step in, to right that wrong....without finding out, what she did for a living. As I said, look at the streets of today, one "hard" look...and some clown, goes for his gun... now, just figure dealing with this type of sick clown for 8-10 hours daily.... and them all thinking, they need to settle up with you...to save face.... would you ask for help? 2nd... I agree with you too... we all have the right to be protected, and have the responsibility to protect ourselves...and sometimes, because of what we do, or not do, we do need help !!!! all situations require differt solutions...In her, I saw a woman whos life had been turned upside down, a woman in great pain, a woman who now had to review her entire life... hopefully after the funeral, of her family. It is not about her, or you, or me..it is about addressing OUR problems, as a complex society and finding honorable solutions...for all.

 

[ksnecktieman]

SteveS,,,, I am not saying this killer did right. I am saying what is most often the case here, we do not have all the facts about him. No, I do not think a judge should make rulings based on fear. I think a judge should make decisions based on justice,,,,, notice I said "justice", I did not say "the law".

I did not say I approve of his actions. I did not say he did right. I also do not know why he did it. A bit more information about him would be welcome.

IMHO, The judge should be responsible for her own security. She should buy herself an alarm, and a firearm, and protect herself. Just maybe, if she was told that flat out, she might decide that ccw would be good. It is legal for her, but not for her neighbors, unarmed citizens can not help her, armed citizens might.

If any of you have not read the fiction book, "Unintended Consequences" yet, now is a good time.

 

[Matthew748]

I feel bad for the slain family members but am aghast at the Judge's remarks. I don't care what position she holds, her life is not worth more than any other law abiding citizen's. I think the politicians and judges (politician-laywer hybrids) have bent the rules in their favor enough as it is. I used to have to go through some pretty terrible areas on the south side of Chicago for work. I feared for my safety and well being more than once. Thanks to the laws of the land, I could not even keep a loaded gun in the front of my car. To do that, I would have to be a Super Citizen.

 

[Dave R]

Criminy. The Judge oughta do what my family did. Get a dog at the pound, and get a CCW permit. (Ya, I know they can't in Chicago. Part of the point.)

Your honor, I lived in Chicago for three years during grad school. I lived in fear every single day knowing that if I had to protect myself from what happened to your family I would go to prison for exercising my right to own and keep firearms as I did not comply with Chicago's and Illinois feckless firearms bans and regulations.

I see no reason why you should not live in the same fear.

Bravo, El Tejon.

 

[gunsmith]

the MSM

is using this crime to attack US ..at least they were on my TV screen last night.
They brought up all the Con versus Lib arguments of the last year that we (our general side) lambasted Judges,think back to that NY thread from a week ago the Court decided that the 2nd was not a individual right ...it's OK City bombing deja vu all over again ,remember Clinton blaming that on "right wing talk radio".....

 

[Jack T.]

I listened to that committee hearing on CSPAN.

When asked point blank by the Chairman if she *asked* for protection, she stated that she had talked to US Marshal X and told him "If they (the white supremacist group targeting her) get my address, we'll talk about it".

So the protection was there, she turned it down, and now is mad because she was a victim.

 

[Boats]

So the protection was there, she turned it down, and now is mad because she was a victim.

Well, that makes her true to form then.

 

[Sam]

What part of "equal protection" doesn't she understand. I get folks PO'ed too. I carry a gun. She can too.

I feel for her family but as for her wanting something special-

Tough

Sam

 

[Logistics]

>>>Jeez. No one is defending the scum bag who murdered those two folks at Judge Lefkow's place. No one.

That does not mean we can't take issue with her melodramatic editorializing to the press. After all, facts remain facts, even in Chicagoland.

1) Lefkow lives in a gun banning political subdivision.
2) Lefkow can afford her own security system.
3) Lefkow's stalker ignored the ineffective gun ban and non-existent home security.
4) Lefkow is whining about motivations for the crime (judicial rhetoric) with no demonstration that it applies to her case.
5) Lefkow argues for even more outsourcing of her non-existent security.
6) Lefkow continues to not get it.
7) Lefkow wants measures taken for her that would not be contemplated, let alone taken, for the typical witness in a criminal case.
8) Lefkow sees nothing wrong or at least ironic about how she should be protected, (on our tab), to a greater degree than a domestic violence victim who appears before her is afforded. Think the cops or Marshals are going to South Chicago and offering security primers to battered mothers on the run?
9) Lefkow is self-important but takes no self-responsibility.
10) Lefkow is a typical liberal.

That's what people are commenting on in this thread.
<<<<<


Boats = the man

Great post.....

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Elitist blissninny, living in denial

Had she been under 24/7 escort, her husband and mother would still be dead.

She also called on lawmakers to dispense as quickly as possible the $12 million Congress has approved to install home security systems for the 2,200 active and semi-retired judges and magistrates in the federal court system.

Because they are too cheap or too stupid to do it for themselves?

Lefkow said more resources need to be given to the U.S. Marshals Service to evaluate potential threats and protect judges. She said judges themselves were not in a position to evaluate threats.

And this gem:

"As recently as last Friday, May 13, I was spotted and harassed in a restaurant in downtown Chicago," she said. "Had that harasser come back not with a nasty sign but with a gun, I would not be here today to speak with you."

Explain how a house alarm will protect you AWAY FROM your house.

She still doesn't get it and never will.

 

[Elmer]

Strangely enough, I believe most of the Federal law enforcement agencies don't give their retired officers CCW privileges.

So, do they get protection too?

 

[Bruce H]

I'll bet the smartest judge in Chicago never thought of declaring all of Mayor Daley's firearm bans unconstitutional and just protecting herself.

 

[JadeFalcon]

So does this mean if someone murders the family of say, a dectective, he can then petition the government to post a battalion of trained attack lemurs to defend his house?

I don't think anyone here is actually arguing with each other...we're all just pissed that yet again a person in a postion of authority is attempting to abuse it...

 

[Arc-Lite]

lots of theory here, and lots of people unable to see anything but themself..the me... me... me.... generation, "If I can't have it...NO ONE should".... the final acts speaks for themself....the scum was after her...and her family is dead...now what does it take for the light to come on ? this person and her family needed protection. If she came accross wrong in your eyes, on tv..... could it be, she just put her people in the ground ? wonder what YOU would be saying!!

 

[JadeFalcon]

I think I'd be wondering why my security system wasn't on/installed/working/under waranty...I'd also wonder why my family didn't have a gun...oh wait, they're illegal there.

I do not think that someone in a position of power, especially one in which the holder is supposed to be intelligent, should be calling for uncessary measures to address a problem that is self inflicted and brought about by design. For too long lawmakers have been addressing their own personal agendas rather than seeing to the needs of the people and the system.

Banning guns and then demanding civil servants for protection is assinine and ignorant. All of this just makes me wonder how far our country is prepared to slide down that slippery slope...

 

[JadeFalcon]

besides, I may be alone in this, but I hold the elected officials of this country to a standard above the average citizen. They should know better!

...though maybe this proves that a college education really doesn't make them smarter or more capable...just more papered.

 

[Sir Aardvark]

No one told her that she HAS to be a judge; if she can't take the heat that the job provides, she can find a new career!. That is what the rest of us normal people would have to do.

I don't believe that it's right for a certain class of people to be provided "protection" at your and mine expense (with the exception of the president/vice-president, of course).

She should not be asking "How can we protect her"; she should be asking "How can we protect EVERY LAW ABIDING CITIZEN".

Nationwide Shall-Issue CCW would be a good start. Nationwide laws like Florida's recently passed "Shoot 'em in the street" law looks pretty good too.
There is A LOT of stuff that can be done to mitigate crime, ranging from locking up real criminals, not first time marijuana users (and the other various injustices caused by the governments failed 'War on Drugs') to making our school system one that actually teaches our kids something of value instead of contributing to a 25% drop out rate (school vouchers would work well here).

Maybe these jokers should acknowledge the fact that all these stupid laws are only followed by the law-abiding citizens, and that the criminals, who by definition are law breakers, aren't going to follow them.

 

[Turkey Creek]

What I find most disturbing of all is the ever present attitude of having someone or some entity, ie government, provide for all of our needs or concerns- what ever happened to the idea of taking the bull by the horns and dealing with a situation for ourselves?- the mind set of "let Sam do it" is pervading our country to the point of creating a population of citizens that have no concept of self- progress from 1776 to now, I wonder- :banghead: