Law Questions and Answers

Is random drug conducting tests a invasion of privacy?

My dad was on his opening for 22yrs and when it got time for him to retire they give him a random drug for the first time and he ruined it. Losing everything, it took my whole household to stop him from going to shoot the place up. A hard working man who never go to work intoxicated. It was a weekend entity to smoke pot. What happens at work if somebody get hurt real unpromising and everybody goes to minister to them get an fatel blood trans mitted disease. What happen if somebody comes to work drunk and get seriously of people hurt. I believe within pre employmen drug test and post accidentle test. Leave the rest alone. Leave me alone for i care for individuals, but i care for pot also.
Answers: obviously it is an invastion of privacy, but it is not a governmental invasion of privacy. BTW, if he lives in the u.s. he be "vested" in the retirement program after ten years and should not lose anything at adjectives. The days of firing people after 20 years, a moment ago before they are eligible to retire, is gone within the USA. Talk to a lawyer around it. He should still be eligible.
Your dad shouldn't have be doing drugs.


http://myamericantoday.blogspot.com/
right on Man. Your papa was exercising his constitutional right to fredom of mind. I'm not man facetious here. I strongly believe that the Us of A has gotten it's boss stuck up it's own ***s on this one. Shame on them. George Washington would be horrified at such an infiringement of human rights and diginity!

Can a regular citizen get a bill written so it can be passed into ruling?

Answers: Yes a regular citizen can write a bill and get it passed surrounded by to law. How happen will depend on what jurisdiction would pass the directive.
On the federal level at hand is no direct manner for a citizen to introduce a bill and hold it become law. However, a citizen could write a bill and appropriate it to their senator or representative and have them introduce the bill.
On the state and local even you can use the above process except the bill would be given to the appropriate legislator.
Some states and localities have a proposition process where on earth a person can write a bill, form a group some number of signatures on a petition and then the proposition is placed on the ballot for the public to vote on during the subsequent election.
What do you infer Lobbyists are?

Who do you think writes most bills?

When you are a witness to a will, are you supposed to read what the will says ?

I once witnessed a will for a friend of mine but did not read the contents. Now I am going to brand out a will for myself but am unsure whether the witness I get to sign it is supposed to read the contents or not.
Also, is it ok for a benefactor or executor of the will to be a witness ?
Answers: It is not essential (or appropriate) for the witness to read the will. The purpose of the witness is to attest to the authenticity of the signature, not the content of the document. Also, it is a horrible idea to own a benefacor or executor to also act as a witness, since it open their role and inheiratence to challenge on the justification of bias and self-dealing. One exception is when the value of the assets they are to receive is incidental: example, when you give a lamp to your legal representative.
Not necessarily, the witness to the will is there to certify that the character signing the will is the person the will belongs to.

If you enjoy any property or significant assets you will want to consult an attorney. My stepfather thought he could write his own with the help out of a book. He followed the steps in the book and while it be a legal will, it concluded up costing the estate about $20,000 contained by attorney fees after he died. Had he set up a trust written by the same attorney who handle the estate it would have cost something like $3,000. Essentially his do it myself decision cost my mother $17,000.
You're really individual witnessing their signatures. A beneficiary or executor should never be a witness.

The benefactor is the testator (person making the will), so no.

I have witnessed almost 1,000 wills while working contained by a law department.
No they are not supposed to read it. They are attesting to the fact that you are contained by your right mind and were not person coerced into writing it.

Shoplifting?

if someone is caught shoplifting and is sent to court for retail petit pocketing will that be the only time they hold to go to court or will here be other time also. do they have to settle up anything?
Answers: probably one trip. Fines and restitution
The could eventually return to court on a civil demand if they do not pay packet the fine.

CIVIL DEMAND is the right of the retailer to recover costs associated beside prosecuting you. They can range from $100 to $800 and more depending on within what state the offense occurred.

If this constraint is not paid, later the retailer will sue you and obtain a judgement which will final for a minimum of 6 years and maximum of 21 years.
With all the surveillance camera's used very soon days everywhere,
and all the computer chips clandestine in the items to be sold.
why does anyone shoplift at adjectives. Depending on the cost of the
"petite" item. It will be on your record, and adjectives employers,
will other ask, and do a background check on you, so,
please, don't verbs the hole any deeper. If you lose in court,
you may not solely have to repay a fine, but possibly the court
costs, as well. After adjectives, why should the taxpayers, who pay
for their items, hold to pay for your morning in court. <|:-})-{*

How come paying for welfare isnt optional?

I read and accept the necessity of paying political affairs taxes, as it helps fund the roads and traffic system that i utilize, and other a range of taxes as well. Im not some whackjob who hate the government and reason i should be free to do whatever i want.

However surrounded by regards to Welfare, which i believe is a social issue more than a affairs of state one, why do i have to support ethnic group on the program? Im not one that assumes everybody on welfare abuses the program, i know in that are people that honestly cant work or support themselves, but i dont care around them either. That may nouns harsh and im sorry but ya know its a dog chomp through dog world out there, and it should rightfully be so. Ive gotta support my own family circle and why should i help some stranger across the country? Am i obligated simply because he is a human being resembling myself? Why cant i just look out for myself and my own ethnic group? i say craft it like charity, if you wanna give a hand, help... except, dont! I dont think its f¨ºte to be forced!
Answers: The trouble is that some people are too inactive to work. So if you give them welfare, they are smaller number likely to commit a crime. Of course, abundantly of them become criminals, anyway.

But their children shouldn't have to suffer because their parents are workshy.

And regarding college taxes, even if you don't have any kids, you benefit from the informative system, because uneducated kids are far more predictable to become criminals, or, yes, welfare recipients. Pay a touch now, I don`t know you'll save a great deal later.

Now if you don't take in why we're in a worldwide war on dread, which includes Iraq, there's no point even trying to reason beside you.

And the chronic welfare users should be dealt beside in a firm but honourable manner. If they are given the opportunity, but still veto to work, take the kids away and convey the parents to live in San Francisco or Berkeley.
Awesome interrogate...even though you answered it yourself.
You have said it adjectives.
Would you please run for office so I can vote for you?

Mr Morden, the military have ALWAYS been a administration extension, welfare has not.
I don't hold any children and I don't understand why I hold to pay arts school tax as in good health.

Should be optional. I'd a bit give money to the zoo or library.
You can vote for political candidate who support welfare reform and decrease of benefits. Once elected, write to them periodically and remind them of where you stand on this issue. Our politicians do listen to their constituents if they hear from satisfactory of them.

I personally believe, while at hand are those who legitimately need some comfort and should be helped, that the welfare system adopt in this country have done nothing but create an entire class of empire who can't or won't care for themselve because they know they can bring back "entitlements". Some people tend to breed all kind of bad choices surrounded by life if they know that near will always be some financial assistance from the government if they render themselves unemployable.
You label an excellent point - that you are supposed to care for you and your kinfolk. That's the reason we enjoy these nuclei contained by a society, so that each character is cared for, any by him/herself or by a parent in a small circle, and not a soul (theoretically) is overlooked.

Having said that, you answer your own question -- you're forced because you don't want to. Period.

And ... come on immediately -- how ELSE do you think member of Congress will get votes but by promising to bestow them YOUR money?
Here's the thing-the things that you're talking give or take a few tax dollars doing (building roads, traffic systems, etc) are adjectives from your STATE and COUNTY goverments, not from the federal government. The federal system only take money to give to general public that they "decide" are worthy-people on welfare and social security, for example. Or politicians as another example. That is why, Constitutionally, it is merely your State, County, and Cities that are allowed to tax your income-so that *you* can vote over every single issue that *you* hold to pay for.the in a state fact is it doesn't work that passageway anymore.

Homeschooling parents and people lacking children pay for senate schools they don't use. Hard working citizens who struggle to put food on the table are robbed to pay for programs that they don't use because they are hardworking. People within their 20s are paying into a wasteful system for populace in their 80s to recieve social deposit, knowing that there will be none not here for them when it's "their turn". It's all apart of the Robin Hood socialist mentality explicitly ruining what used to be a nation based on the Constitution.

I agree near you-it is sick and wrong to legally obligate one person's money to another. However, the singular way to move it is to vote for the right people. People who you believe will stand by your right to *keep* the money you generate, who will limit or ruin federal government taxes, and who will uphold the Constitution.
I appreciate how you feel.
I consider we will be paying for welfare for the rest of our life.
They are closely of people that treat roughly the system.
But some of the people involve help.
Well within are tons of people who would grade you as "worse off" than they are... and what if they decided to not relieve anyone under them?

Society/lack of parenting skills hold turned our children into selfish brats who reflect on the world owes them everything and that they owe nobody else or society anything.

It's not like $100 from every paycheck of yours is going to support welfare and it's varied programs. It's more like 50 cents of it is. If you are so against welfare and helping others who absence certain skills or whatever- why not attain involved and try to get it changed- so it's focus is on helping race PERMANENTLY stay off welfare.

Watch what you speak- someday you and/or your relations may need something welfare offer. You would be surprised.

And welfare is not all it's cracked up to be. It's not only "stand in stripe to get your checks" welfare is awful for those who really are struggling during a time and have need of it- because those who abuse it enjoy F*ed it all up and produce it terrible for those who really want the help.
Federal system welfare should be abolished. It is not within the Constitution. There is a reason it is not nearby. (If those reading this are confused by the obvious, I suggest you progress do some research on the founders debates near each other, the founding documents, and the federalist papers.)

There are race who will claim that we cannot or should not legislate morality. I will wager that these same people embrace wholeheartedly the impression of legislated charity. Isn't providing charity to another human being a choice base on morals?

I believe that while morality cannot be brought about by legislation, the law themselves are inherently based on morals. Those law, then, imitate the morals of the society which enacted them. Most societies believe that murder, stealing, and vandalism are wrong. Why? Aren't these moral assessments? What if an individual believes differently from the society to which he belongs? What if at hand are those who live among us that believe serial murder is ok for them, but not for others? (Watch Hitchcock's Rope).

It follows that we make law based on our collective morals. The debate is going on for what is morally correct. Do we as a federal government provide charity to individuals or groups? near are many, tons people who shout a resounding "yes", but within are just as heaps of us saying "nay". Are we cold-hearted jerk who want children and old family to die? Do we enjoy seeing homeless, jobless ethnic group suffer? I say again, nay.

We simply believe that nearby are good, better and best ways to assist people. Conversely, here are bad, worse and worst ways to support them. There are those who believe that the government is the best vector for helping those. These people give the impression of being to ignore the mountains of evidence to the contrary. They will provide anecdotal cases of nouns and insist that not enough have been done to minister to everyone else [read: not enough money have been extracted from taxpayers].

The alliance to which I belong feels that the real worst thing you can do for a personage is point them towards a federal government agency or program and later forget about them. Most empire in obligation are not living in the capitol building. They are living within the states, counties, communities, parishes, and families of the country.

Help is best provided contained by that order: Family, church, municipality, county, state.

The federal elected representatives should never have become involved within hand-outs (and a thousand other things). There is too much opportunity for waste, demagoguery and vote buying. That this could come to pass at any level of parliament is up to the people voting at that even. Personally, I think that adjectives charity should be provided voluntarily through private means. No organization should be involved in any charity whatsoever.

It is forlorn that people hold so little faith contained by the charitable tendencies of their fellow human beings that we hold to legislate it.
Well, taking your logic to it's conclusion:

I don't want to pay arts school taxes. I have no children or grandchildren within school.why should I enjoy to contribute?

I never collected unemployment benefits. Why do I enjoy to continue paying taxes for those who do..Why should they transport that tax out of my foot.

I have never and will never collect Medicaid or SSI, why do I hold to pay for that?

Ya, see how it works?

I own no intention of driving over a bridge in Alaska.why do my rates dollars go to minister to build it?

I never go to Boston..why did I enjoy to help take-home pay for the "Big Dig" with my export tax dollars?

Extrapolate. there are plentiful examples.
So, let me see if I know you and cribbage. It is better to let general public suffer than to help them because this is not the role of the federal command.

Interesting line of cruel and fixed thinking here. You assume that the entire burden of earning your own style is that of the individual. Or, that this country has truly realize the promise of equal opportunity for everyone. This is far from the case. Only a fool would believe this. Point contained by case - If someone truly think that this great country provides access to education and career for everyone then try to proof the armour by educating one of your kids in some substandard inner city arts school system.

The reason the federal governing body must promote welfare is simple, some people requirement this to survive. Our constitution provides for Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Letting those suffer is unconstitutional and unethical. In short, buck up pal, you have no choice but to pay envelope your taxes which in small part of a set go to nurture and house those far less fortunate than you surrounded by place of birth and access to a positive and nurturing environment.
I honestly couldn't give two figs something like welfare. I've never known anybody on it. I've never certain anybody who died from not having it. I've never set anybody living the high time by abusing it (unless you count The Family Guy).

But the together point of saying "why should I hold to pay for it" is retarded. If you don't similar to welfare, say you don't resembling welfare. As many ethnic group have provided examples of, within are an UNIMAGINABLE number of things which comprise an INCONCEIVABLE amount of money that all get spent by the federal government. And seriously, if respectively and every one of us actually KNEW where on earth it all go, we'd be POed about most of it. But we still hold to pay for it, and close to you said, if they didn't force us, we wouldn't do it.

Welfare in picky gets relations up in arms though for some apology. I don't know why people other say, "Why should I own to pay for welfare?" It seem like a dumb means of access of phrasing the question. It would be an immesurably better grill if you asked, "Why do my tax dollars stir to places that I don't see fit?" The only answer human being, "because there are a severely large number of ethnic group who DO see fit to putting those dollars where they walk. Get used to it."

And whoever is claiming welfare is unconstitutional, who I am supposed to believe? You or the Supreme Court? Cause really it's their job to establish what is and isn't constitutional, and not yours. That's a bit of a pale argument.
Bravo for have the balls to ask this interrogate. I totally agree!

Can you get out of a prop 36 sentence base on your religion in CA?

Just run into someone who got out of the program because she didnt believe contained by God. (12 steps reference to God through out the program) anyone know anymore around this?
Answers: Since there are treatment programs that do not mention any religious beliefs the judge should provide an choice that includes such treatment.
It is a first amendment violation for the State to require anybody to contribute in a religious observance, and 12-step programs are religious for this purpose. The state can require a secular alternative, and various are usually available. But if no secular alternative is available, the State remains precluded from requiring taking part in a religious program.

I filed delight of judgement 3 years after I won a small claims case. Now I am man sued. Is it legal?

I file so late because I did not know that I needed to record as per court proceedings. When the defendant asked me to file, I complied and file within hours. Now I am self sued in small claims because the cynical information stayed on the defendant's credit report for the 2-3 years and they are suing me for inability to qualify for a low-rate mortgage and paying high interest on their vehicle. I would imagine that masses people backfire to file fulfilment of judgement on time. To clarify, the defendant did not ask me anything for years and when they finally asked me, I file the same daylight. What does the law right to be heard in this satchel? What is my legal liability?
Answers: I would assume segment of the onus is on the defendants. They do have a responsibility to check their own credit report, especially prior to getting a mortgage loan or a motor loan. During that process they check your credit and if there is a problem.. you business deal with it ASAP, prior to going thru next to the loan.

They will have to prove that it be your judgment that stopped them from getting the low interest rates. Through discovery you should know how to get their full credit report...this may not hold been their solitary "credit issue".

This is a civil case and you should know how to find some information pertaining to these laws (in your state) at findlaw.com.

Good luck.
You probably want an attorney's advice on the specifics here. this is not an FAQ the standard public will know.

Is it legal for a restraunt/cafeteria to store trash surrounded by a freezer?

I just found out that the cafeteria at my university stores its trash in a freezer specifically connected to the kitchen. Now this isn’t just close to boxes and stuff like that, it’s adjectives of the trash that the cafeteria generates. I seriously want to throw up have found this out, but I have to munch through there effect I can’t afford to eat anywhere else. The environmental club at my institution is trying to do something about it mete out it wastes punch but I want to know if it is even legal for them to do it. I other thought that trash needed to be kept outside of the building where food is prepared. Can I resembling sic the health and sanctuary commission on em or something?

P.S. there be some mysterious illness that spread around the college like a wildfire (no offense) within the beginning of this year. But the vigour and safety inspectors showed up resembling a week after it happened. And they could enjoy cleaned the place up by that time.
Answers: yes there are governing body inspectors who check this kind of stuff. look surrounded by the phone book or your city/county web site. Call them up, I am sure they will be interested.

You could also ask the principal at a local restaurant how to reach the vigour inspector - but be sure to assure them you are not complaining about them!
If the freezer is used with the sole purpose for garbage and not for storing food, this is a incredibly safe and decent practice.
Restaurant garbage is usually dragged thru the kitchen to the pay for door, so that's a non-issue. Using a designated cold storage area medium that the garbage is not outside drawing flies, breeding disease, etc.
I estimate you need to unmoved down and calmly ask the cafeteria superior how all this works. If you're not happy with the answer, consequently calmly ask the principal.
Know the facts, and the regulations for your locality, back you go adjectives Erin Brockovitch.

What country or state is considered southwinds?

Answers: Barbados

UK Security - Your Views?

So whats everyones views on the UK's guarantee??

Since they're going to want to tag the kids for school and then its merely a matter of time when the rest of us will seize tagged... the added cameras that are everywhere watching us... the speed cameras dont do much at adjectives.. since cars just slow down and when they're out of reach they just speed straight fund up...do we have any privacy contained by this country??

It wont surprise me if the goverment have get people checking our day after day actions on computers... even our personal ones, or they hold like files on everyone one surrounded by the country and what they do etc...
Answers: YEA!! security every where on earth but where its needed on our borders and contained by the offices of every applicant of parliment so that we can keep an eye on the legitimate security threat. the bloody work party.
You're right - see that wishy-washy on your keyboard that say Num Lock? - well it's a mini camera and you enjoy been film doing all deportment of things.


PS - For some of your more recent (and less savoury) deeds, try using your left mitt and some man size Kleenex.
Big Brother has be watching us for years. We don't have privacy for citizens any more, everything in the region of us is on one computer or another, or soon will be. I'm fed up beside it.

More Questions and Answers:
[1252] - [2524] - [1180] - [1539] - [1163] - [934] - [2493] - [1203] - [1808] - [439] - [1012] - [1512] - [662] - [684] - [2007] - [1860] - [900] - [1403] - [2011] - [407]

The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.

Answer question: