A legal note from Marshal Willick about developments – good, bad, and ugly – in the application of family law to cases involving military personnel (part two).
“In the 30 years I’ve done military divorces, I’ve seen plenty of bad
behavior on both sides, including a shocking number of military marriages
involving unforgivable recurring physical abuse by members against their spouses
and children.”
“The single most advantaged group of retirees in the United States has no cause whatsoever to complain about it.”
“Zoo keepers “put their lives on the line,” as do construction workers, cops,
fire-fighters, and a host of others. The sort of entitlement mentality
exhibited by the military groups is not (usually) seen from any of those
workers, and neither would or should be tolerated if it was tried. Besides,
whether a career is risky is irrelevant.”
It should not be assumed that the nut-jobs who cannot focus beyond their own
predispositional focus are all located elsewhere. One local member of the
military-obsessed fraternity – a lawyer! – actually wrote in, protesting the
last legal note (No. 46, “Military allowances for child/spousal support,” posted
at http://www.willicklawgroup.com/newsletters), and suggesting that garnishing
military pay was some kind of illicit money-making scheme.
“Military retirement benefits are just like every other bit of property accrued during a marriage, and belong to both parties. This remains true when one party attempts to
convert the form of the benefits to disability after divorce, and thereby steal property already adjudged to belong to somebody else.”
“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
“Eventually, these nuts will reach Nevada, and it can only be hoped that there is
both a high-enough IQ, and sufficient common-sense resistance to absurdity, to
prevent anyone here from drinking their kool-aid.”
“When a flag-wrapped militant shows up, demanding special privilege in the form of
financially victimizing his wife and children, he should be shunned as the
opportunistic reprobate that he is.”
“They seem to have a nearly universal “if you’re not with us, you’re against us”
mindset, unable to comprehend the possibility that informed, honorable people
might disagree with them.”
“The proponents of the fringe-group positions being sold to State legislatures
are entirely fixated, unconcerned with any opinion but their own, and have no
concept of equal justice under law, equity, reciprocation, spousal or child
rights, or anything else that does not mesh with their particular branch of
jihad. Trying to have a rational discussion with them is the oratorical
equivalent of stepping in bubble gum.”
“The point is the utterly shameless hypocrisy and over-reaching of these groups in adopting whatever rationale leads to the conclusion that they get more –…………”
“Despite all the advantages handed to them, however, some military members just
can’t resist the temptation to ask for even more special treatment.”
“a certain segment of the military community has decided that its members are so “special” that they should be exempt from the laws governing everyone else –………”
“Military members are the single most favored group of retirees in any retirement
system in the United States.”
“They routinely portray themselves as “victims” of the law-……….”
“The groups in question, pretending to be large organizations and operating under
important-sounding names such as “Veterans for Justice,” have persuaded
themselves that they are so “special” that they deserve to be treated
differently than everyone else under the law.”
“It is an ugly but altogether too-often-seen self-delusion.”
“But the fringe military-retiree groups are even more self-impressed, and
self-obsessed.”
“And some of them have gone beyond rationalizing that they deserve superior
rights as a matter of “patriotism,” to believing that a higher power gives some
theoretical foundation for their greed.”
“In other words, they are whack-jobs. But they are persistent.”
“The Arizona statute effectively nullified decades of solid and
nationally-respected case law. (If and when a measure of sanity is returned to
the Arizona legislature, repeal of that measure should be the first matter of
business.)”
**************************************************************************************
AND TO WRAP UP THIS ENTRY, WHAT A PROFESSIONAL THINKS OF MR. WILLICK:
C. “THEY WALK AMONG US”
It should not be assumed that the nut-jobs who cannot focus beyond their own predispositional focus are all located elsewhere. “One local member ofthemilitary-obsessed fraternity– a lawyer! – actually wrote in, protesting the last legal note (No. 46, “Military allowances for child/spousal support,” posted at http://www.willicklawgroup.com/newsletters), and suggesting that garnishing military pay was some kind of illicit money-making scheme. The inane note ignored, of course, that if garnishment has been ordered, it is because the obligor has ignored his duty to make court-ordered child and spousal support, and that the sum garnished goes to the spouse and children who have been left unsupported. The point is that there are some members of the Nevada Bar who just shouldn’t be.”
usvetbloodmoney 