La Supreme Court Candidate

[Pacioli]

Jeffry Sanford, candidate for La Supreme Court Justice was working the crowd today at my HOA fall social. He approached the small group I was in, conversing, and introduced himself. He seemed like a nice enough guy, spoke about Jeffersonian principles, etc. I asked him for his opinion on the upcoming La Constitutional amendment regarding gun rights. He floored me when he responded that he was unaware of any ballot initiative regarding gun rights. He quickly fell back into his talking points about Jeffersonian principles, yada, yada, yada. How disappointing that a person holding themselves out for supreme court could be completely unaware of such an important ballot initiative. I attempted to go to his web site but it will not load. All in all, I just don't see this guy as a serious person. I don't have a candidate in the race, I can't name any other contestants. I'm just terribly disappointed that someone running for such a post could be ignorant of current events. He won't get my vote.

 

[Leonidas]

Mine, either. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[bigjakewelch]

This is a point that is very close to home for me. My father ,Judge "Duke" Welch, is running for the Louisiana Supreme Court. He is aware of the 2nd amendment vote on the upcoming ballot. He is a member of the NRA and is a Concealed Carry license holder and is a out spoken public servant when it comes to "Gun Rights" and conservative ideals. If any of you have a question on his stance on any topic feel free to shoot me a PM and I'll do my best to get an answer for you. This is an important race and I'd like to see him get it. As far as I know he is the only candidate that served in the armed forces. Thanks for reading this.

 

[Braud05]

I am new to this forum and stumbled on this topic. Guys, I am not trying to start any flame war but I actually think you have this guy pegged wrong. I have asked his view on this topic on his FB page and I believe he has a pretty good response. 2A and abortion are my two key issues for any candidates. I am trying to find a link to post.

 

[charlie12]

This is a point that is very close to home for me. My father ,Judge "Duke" Welch, is running for the Louisiana Supreme Court. He is aware of the 2nd amendment vote on the upcoming ballot. He is a member of the NRA and is a Concealed Carry license holder and is a out spoken public servant when it comes to "Gun Rights" and conservative ideals. If any of you have a question on his stance on any topic feel free to shoot me a PM and I'll do my best to get an answer for you. This is an important race and I'd like to see him get it. As far as I know he is the only candidate that served in the armed forces. Thanks for reading this.

Your daddy was my Councilman, your mama was my Councilwoman and your brother is my Councilman.

 

[Braud05]

Well, I highly doubt Pacioli fabricated his chance meeting with the fellow... and if 2A issues were big with him, he would pretty much HAVE to know about the constitutional amendment.

Moot point for me... Welch was getting my vote anyway. But thanks to Jim for this heads-up anyway...

.

I am not saying he fabricated it. I believe him, I would feel the same way. He most certainly SHOULD know whats on the ballot. I'm only saying that I think he is a supporter of our rights. Here is his quote on facebook, its not a rehearsed answer that seems to be the case of most political rhectoric.


Freedoms written in a book are no better than the guns we own to protect them from Government intrusion. A great Supreme Court Justice can throw out unconstitutional law, insure justice in the courts and make clear that a citizen is justified in using whatever force is necessary to defend his rights. But when armed men try and take you without a warrant, or stop you on the street without probable cause to believe you have committed a crime, or prevent you from speaking out in support of your Constiutional liberty, we better have the weapons necessary to stop it. Because that stuff happens in real time. Not after the fact. All I can do as Supreme Court Justice is determine that the use of force was justified in defense against a constitutional violation. As the well-armed militia, we the citizens are all responsible for keeping constitutional violations from happening to begin with.

August 21 at 8:35pm via mobile · Unlike · 6

 

[Jeffry Sanford]

Thank you Braud05 for finding and posting my accurate statement on the right to keep and bear arms. As Jefferson said, the good thing about the right to bear arms is you only need it when they try and take it away. Because I long ago made the decision that the right was fundamental to my unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, I dont worry about anyone taking it away. I will die fighting for it along with the other patriots here in South Louisiana who won't let that happen. That said, I obviously should know of the issues on the ballot (and will be informed by the time I vote); however, Pacioli is entirely correct that I did not know there was a proposed constitutional amendment relative to gun control. And my website is often down for some reason. He is right about that too. My IT guy makes one excuse after another. Believe me it is frustrating. As far as who will best represent your interests on the Supreme Court, I'm the only independent in the race and the only person running for this office who is not a professional politician. To tell you the truth, and with all due respect to the Honorable Judge Welch, I don't trust professional politicians. I state my views on my facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/#!/sanfordforjustice. I also answer all questions emailed to jsanford@sanfordforjustice.org. You are all invited to like the page and keep up with the campaign there. God bless you. Goodnight.

 

[Xenon]

Geez there are a lot of horses in this race. It's gonna come down to who "knows" the most people. The real vote will be the runoff.

Another thing, if a Supreme Court Candidate doesn't know about the 2A vote, we aren't getting the word out well enough. Jeffry, I hope you stick around the website and educate yourself on the topic (amongst others). Post back when you have a "position"

 

[bigjakewelch]

tell you the truth, and with all due respect to the Honorable Judge Welch, I don't trust professional politicians.

The reference to a "professional politician" would imply that the only position that he has ever held is a political office, and that statement is False. He has held an office of some sort for a long time, but when you state that a Judge is a politician and not a public servant shows that you don't understand why he was elected for so long. He was started out as a young man that wanted to "serve" his country, so he joined the Air Force (during the Vietnam War). When he finished his commission he came back to Louisiana with his young family and wanted to provide for them in the best way possible so he went to school, LSU Law School to be exact. After he graduated he found a job with another Attorney in Zachary. He worked for several years along side with him and then started his own practice. He had his own practice until he was elected for the 19th Distric Criminal Court as a "Public Servant" . He has held other offices such as City Council for the town of Baker and Metro Council. He ran for these positions to be a because he saw a need to be filled for the betterment of the community not the pay. Those positions were some of the lowest paid public servant positions on the books back then. Throughout his being Councilman he ran his business as well. So to say that he is a "Profesional Politician" is wrong and I would hope that you would retract the statement because it is of a false nature and it is one mans opinion and not fact. I could form an opinion of you and what you think of the office of Supreme Court by the way you say that it is "Political" and not a public service, but I will refrain. Thank you and good day.

 

[Jeffry Sanford]

BigJakeWelch. *I am not saying anything personal about your father. *It is my political belief, however, that the independents must rise up in this country and take it back. *The parties are corrupt institutions that exist for the sole purpose of grabbing and maintaining power. *They tell any kind of lie to get elected and*do not address the issues that must be addressed. *While the party candidates in this race have not told any extremely obvious lies in this race, they don't address the real issues facing this state. *And that makes me think they are status quo party politicians. *I may be wrong. *But to convince me a pro politician is for real, I'd have to see him drop his party affiliation and run independent. *And all of that said, None of it has anything to do with your father or any candidate in this race, personally. *These are the political beliefs that caused me to run this race. *God bless you and your father. *And all the luck in the world in the election.

 

[bigjakewelch]

If it wasn't personal, why did you address "The Honorable Judge Welch"? I understand your stance on "Politicians" and the way that the parties conduct their business. There are some positions that I disagree with that the Republican party agrees. They are the closest to my belief and morals that is out there, but with that said I too am an Independent and I vote as to where my beliefs and morals guide me. As I hope the rest of the public would do in the upcoming elections.
I have no "Facebook" account so I'm not sure if I can see your page or not. So if you would clarify a few things for me as to your stance on a couple of questions I would thank you. Are you a member of the NRA? Do you have a Conceled Carry Permit? Did you ever serve in the military? If so what branch and for how long? These are things that concern me about the candidates in the upcoming election. I can't find an answer to these questions on the web sites that the candidates have set up to campaign for election.
I have more concerns than this only but the candidate that I support has a record as to where he stands on these issues and others. These records are public record and can be seen by all, and are not opinion based. With this posted I will await the answer. I wish the best for you in the upcoming election and hope that my post hasn't been seen as an attack or un-tasteful. I am nearly trying to make rebuttal. Thank you and may God bless you.

 

[Emperor]

Jeffry Sanford, candidate for La Supreme Court Justice was working the crowd today at my HOA fall social. He approached the small group I was in, conversing, and introduced himself. He seemed like a nice enough guy, spoke about Jeffersonian principles, etc. I asked him for his opinion on the upcoming La Constitutional amendment regarding gun rights. He floored me when he responded that he was unaware of any ballot initiative regarding gun rights. He quickly fell back into his talking points about Jeffersonian principles, yada, yada, yada. How disappointing that a person holding themselves out for supreme court could be completely unaware of such an important ballot initiative. I attempted to go to his web site but it will not load. All in all, I just don't see this guy as a serious person. I don't have a candidate in the race, I can't name any other contestants. I'm just terribly disappointed that someone running for such a post could be ignorant of current events. He won't get my vote.

I am worried that the "Vote Yes on 2" initiative is not gaining more traction or attention outside of the gun crowd. We need to step up our game. Also, does anyone know the verbiage on the ballot---you know how they can make a yes vote seem like a no vote sometimes with the gobbldy-goop. I want to feel comfortable that "Yes" indeed means "Yes!"

 

[Hitman]

I am worried that the "Vote Yes on 2" initiative is not gaining more traction or attention outside of the gun crowd. We need to step up our game. Also, does anyone know the verbiage on the ballot---you know how they can make a yes vote seem like a no vote sometimes with the gobbldy-goop. I want to feel comfortable that "Yes" indeed means "Yes!"

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?92059-2012-Constitutional-Amendments

 

[Emperor]

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?92059-2012-Constitutional-Amendments

Thanks, but none of that is the "actual verbiage" that will show up on the voting booth wall?!?

 

[Hitman]

Thanks, but none of that is the "actual verbiage" that will show up on the voting booth wall?!?

Uh the link in the OP does!

 

[Emperor]

Uh the link in the OP does!

I stand corrected! Thanks, Sir!

 

[Cat]

I am not saying he fabricated it. I believe him, I would feel the same way. He most certainly SHOULD know whats on the ballot. I'm only saying that I think he is a supporter of our rights. Here is his quote on facebook, its not a rehearsed answer that seems to be the case of most political rhectoric.


Freedoms written in a book are no better than the guns we own to protect them from Government intrusion. A great Supreme Court Justice can throw out unconstitutional law, insure justice in the courts and make clear that a citizen is justified in using whatever force is necessary to defend his rights. But when armed men try and take you without a warrant, or stop you on the street without probable cause to believe you have committed a crime, or prevent you from speaking out in support of your Constiutional liberty, we better have the weapons necessary to stop it. Because that stuff happens in real time. Not after the fact. All I can do as Supreme Court Justice is determine that the use of force was justified in defense against a constitutional violation. As the well-armed militia, we the citizens are all responsible for keeping constitutional violations from happening to begin with.

August 21 at 8:35pm via mobile · Unlike · 6

I don't mean to put words in your mouth Mr. Sandford, but I'm uncertain if this sentiment should be read as strongly as it came across to me. Because it sounded like you are encouraging forceful refusal against being officially detained by sworn officers of the law?

 

[Jeffry Sanford]

Thanks Curmudgeon. I am and have for many years described myself as a professional peoples' attorney. That means I represent people, not a specific kind of problem. If an expertise is required that I do not have, I find it. My hero was my father, an attorney, who taught me that we must be of service in this lifetime in order to find our purpose in life. Because I idolized him, I thought what he did was of the utmost importance and highest good. It is this ideal that I have always brought to the practice of law. I was trained by the most respected and ethical attorney in Baton Rouge in the last fifty years, a gentleman named Sam D'Amico. It is love of our natural rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which motivate me to represent the people who so often are fighting against overwhelming odds of a government prosecution, a big corporation or an insurance company. As in my practice, it is the protection and preservation of these rights for which I am running this campaign.

 

[Jeffry Sanford]

Cat. I am opposed, always have and always will oppose forceful detention of people without probable cause. I was born and raised with an understanding of freedom to mean we need not submit to an unconstitutional exercise of authority. Like with gun control, I oppose any unjustified infringement on my freedom with reasonable force. That is my right as a citizen of a country which is founded and exists on the principle of freedom. A law-abiding law enforcement officer would never forcefully detain someone without probable cause and one who does should be resisted with all force necessary to prevent the constitutional violation.

 

[Jeffry Sanford]

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?92059-2012-Constitutional-Amendments

Hitman and Emperor:

I just reviewed the language of the amendment. It can be found at http://legis.la.gov/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=812575

A yes is a real yes. And I will therefore, of course, vote yes.