Law Questions and Answers
"Should pornography have first amendment protection?"?
do reason about it.Answers: No! Pornography have been proven time and time again to be hurtful to those people and family that it touches. Like illegal drugs that excite coarse behavior, attitudes, and emotions, pornography should not be protected extent.
Absolutely.
Consider the number of things that were barred as pornography when they came out and presently aren't even considered salacious.
Why not? Most people I know are not challenging pornography but rather the assuage of access to it for minors to include having stuff within shop windows and such. Most answer the San Fran parades beside assless chaps and other goings on that may be fun but belong surrounded by private.
So to sum up, most people dont contradict porn or sex but believe there is a time and a place for them
Yes, when we lose protection lower than the law, next we start a down hill slope that endanger all speech. Child pornography is a crime beneath laws, that do not touch on 1st amendment rights. I don't guardianship what adults do with respectively other or what adults care to examine. Do you?
No, we should create a National Moralty Czar that can tell adjectives Americans what is acceptable to read or see. Next the Czar can create "thought laws" and we can start dictating what Americans are allowed to think. Eventually we can arrest and torture adjectives Americans who dare to think something i.e. not approved by the government.
This is single way to buy and sell with the enemy of freedom who want to destroy our country by looking at pornography.
okay, but 1st
is Playboy pornography ?
Yes, most of it should be protected.
Lots of things enjoy an adverse effect on society...alcohol and gambling are two that come to mind and both of those are allowed. Not every one that gambles or drinks have a problem, same with pornography. Not to mention the govt have no business telling populace what to do or not to do with their lives.
Yes.
Same answer as two months ago when you asked the EXACT same grill.
Clarity of term is needed: Pornography, (Greek for the writing of prostitutes) is LEGAL so long as it is not OBSCENE per the current officially recognized definition of OBSCENITY and all actor or illusion of actor are over the magic age of 18 and do not appear to be younger.
Obscenity is not permitted ---
The to hypothetical "Should --- have 1st amendment protection." IMO Yes, writing -- descriptions --- are thoughts --- the government ought not be within the business of though control.
This would also apply to the misnamed "Hate Crime" laws.
I do find it amusing that abundant of the groups that seek to abolish enforcement of obscenity law (adult, children, whatever) are the same that desire to enforce or establish Hate Crime laws --- Which make one wonder at the ability of these individuals to muse a problem beyond its immediate sentiment.
Yes of course.
Why wouldn't it?
First Amendment protects unpopular speech most of adjectives - popular speech needs no protection.
If you don't approaching porn, then you own ample ways to avoid it, just similar to people who don't similar to this church or that cult or some other political group can just look right through them if they wish, while nation who are interested in the message can soak up it.
What act exempted union from anti-trust provisions?
A)the clayton anti-trust actB)the adamson conduct yourself
C)the federal reserve act
Answers: Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
Fixed some of the problems next to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. It exempted Labor Unions & Agricultural organizations.
I'm pretty sure it be A.
Liberty what it does mean & what is the curbing of it ?
many ethnic group think no control of liberty .Answers: Liberty finances freedom of choice with the responsibility to stroke reasonabley. "De Opresso libra" freedom from opression.
It confers rights, with the limitations of responsibility.
I may swing my fist...my right...UNTIL it contacts your trunk.
Liberty means man enabled to make choices and to be responsible for the outcome of your choices.
"You play--you pay"
Simply put, autonomy is what a well feed person seek. The right to think, exploit, dream, hope. The right to choose.
Anyone who says independence ends at the law have been completely brainwashed. The amount of law does not determine the definition of liberty. And of late because something is a law doesn't be determined it is a just directive. The intent of the founding fathers be to limit the government powers so that the only law could be ones that protect peoples liberty. For instance, if your neighbor kill you, he be infringing on your freedom, because he'd be taking your life. But if society didn't earnings for your healthcare, well that wouldn't be crooked because in actuality you'd be taking other peoples money if they did. But I digress. I'm so sick of associates automatically condemning those who break the law. The first piece we must do is analyze the law and determine if it is in recent times. And I don't wanna hear "This is a democray, people choose the law so they are just." Two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch is a democracy, that doesn't trade name it right. That's what the constitution was expected to prevent from happening, but after people fixed they could start interpreting the constitution the way they saw fit. Both focal parties are guilty of this; anyone who say otherwise is a fool.
Taxes!!!!!!!!!!?
i saw this video called "America: Freedom to Fascism " and its in the order of of the taxes that we are suppost pay taxes, that directive suppostly doesnt exist, is that true??Answers: Yes, there is a regulation saying that most race have to repay taxes. That law can be found contained by Title 26 U.S.C.
http://www.statute.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
Specifically, § 1, § 61, § 62, § 63, § 3402 and § 6011 apply to most individual's situations.
http://www.statute.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
http://www.statute.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
http://www.statute.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
http://www.imperative.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
http://www.ruling.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
http://www.statute.cornell.edu/uscode/html/u...
Title 26 is the codification of the various income toll acts that enjoy been passed by Congress over the years. The structure of the current due laws originate from the Internal Revenue Act of 1954. That can be found in the U.S. Statutes at Large, Vol. 68A, genesis on page 3. The U.S. Statutes at Large can be viewed at Federal Depository Libraries. You can find a Federal Depository Library surrounded by your state at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/libraries.html
BTW, "Freedom to Fascism" is full of inaccuracies and misconceptions. Many of the quotes contained by the movie are taken out of context. Also, many of the so-called "experts" the movie interviews are any ex-cons or have current due problems. Irwin Schiff, is currently in prison serving his THIRD conviction for income excise evasion. Bill Benson has also be in prison. Joe Bannister, while he hasn't be convicted, has lost his CPA license. Sherry Peel Jackson, have recently be convicted of willful failure to wallet. Vernice Kuglin was acquit of willful failure to directory, but she ended up settling near the IRS for $520,000 on the $960,000 in income. The amount of income taxes she would enjoy paid would own been something like $280,000.
In summary, the income tax tenet does exist and it is legal. Pay your taxes and stay out of trouble. You will be better past its sell-by date in the long-run.
If you enjoy other questions from the movie concerning income taxes, I suggest you look them up at the following website. http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html
Taxes!!!!!!!!!!?
LIBERALS!!!!!!!!
One mode to find out all the law is to not pay the taxes. If within was no such ruling, do you think adjectives the rich people would be paying them?
If someone says they will cut themselves if you stop discussion to them what should you do?
Before this guy that is terrorizing me said he would destroy me if I stopped talking to him. Now, he said "I could never massacre you because I love you." and he went on to voice he would cut himself if I stop talking to him. I want to gain rid of this creep!!! What do I do? Do I have grounds for a restraining direct? If I showed the judge the print outs of these conversations on Instant Messenger could I go and get a restraining order?Answers: Get a gun. Learn to use it in good health, then distribute him a knife. Hopefully he finishes up the profession himself, but if he comes after you with it, you can afterwards shoot him.
It's a slam dunk for a restraining order...you get his name and address?
Tell the yank to cut away, and you won't be held hostage by such a threat.
I would certainly try. Don't believe that he wouldn't hurt you. He sounds mentally unstable and make him capable of anything...If you know anyone within his family try to put on alert them of his strange behavior.
God Bless and Be Safe!!!
1, tell lots of associates about him and whats going on
2, report it to the police, surrounded by smaller cities they may go communicate to him other than that they will narrate you to get a restraning command against him.
3, depending on your age, call his parents and notify them what he is saying and doing.
4. cut adjectives ties with him, dont email , settle call him at adjectives, if he calls you swing up on him. Dont talk to him, not even to say-so something mean , of late never say a word to him, he'll move about away.
5. once you have a restraning establish , if he comes near you report him, if he comes after you, KILL HIM, he required to die anyways and your in the clear because you surrounded by fear for your enthusiasm.
This person is slighting and you need to draw from away from him quickly. Don't allow him to be paid you feel guilty and don't allow him to threaten you. You could contact a legal representative, show the lawyer the IM's and emails and see if you can gain a restraining order. If the substance is sufficiently threatening, that's a strong possibility.
If not, keep them anyway. Then convey this man a letter stating contained by no uncertain lingo that you want no further contact with him contained by person, by phone, email or IM. If you own any further contact from him, you will press charges of harrassment. Make sure you send the memorandum by snail mail near return receipt and hold it signed for. Keep a copy of the letter at home and when the returned taking comes with his signature on it, put that next to the letter.
If he contacts you surrounded by any way after that, put together a note of it on the calendar consequently go to the police, transport your evidence and your copy of the letter and the signed tally and press charges.
Abusers have a intensely hard time keeping at it if the other character stands up for themselves and doesn't back down. As Dr Phil puts it, you school others how to treat you and if you back down, you tutor this man that's it's ok to run rough shod over you and that he never has to respect you.
Be warn, if you do stand up to him and demand he walk out you alone, he may do something harmful to himself (or try to to you). Do NOT allow him to put together you feel guilty. You are NOT responsible for how he feel or for his happiness. Only he is. If he tries to come wager on at you, call the police and really put together your boundaries clear.
Call Dr. Phil,or some other "shrink".
Stay away from this guy--completely!!.
In the state of Indiana, what age can a child be put on the stand to say who she requests to live with?
Answers: While the imperative may permit it, I would importantly advise against this. The decree on where to live is not the child's and the child should never be placed surrounded by the position where they be aware of the decision is theirs. It is a cruel piece to do to a child and many courts will not allow it.
Instead, consider a guardian poster litum. The GAL will interview the child and in the process take an understanding of where on earth the child prefers to live and why. This saves the child from mortal dragged in to court. The GAL can also look at the situation surrounded by each home and form unbiased recommendation.
Actually, the child can be any age as long as the Judge can determine that the child knows the difference between unfolding the truth and telling a story.
Most judges don't approaching for children to testify about this issue because it pits the child against one of the parents, or it lines up the child near one of the parents against the other one. Most judge's feel that this class of testimony might create irreparable devastate to the family section, even though the unit no longer lives together.
Now, I strongly suspect your put somebody through the mill really is: at what age can I be the one who determines who I live with?
While most states right to be heard that ages 12-14 is the age range, I don't know any state that say that is carved within stone. The Court still has the responsibility to achievement in the best interest of the child, and while the child's wishes will be strongly considered, the Court still have the responsibility to make the final determination.
** Note: This is a broad discussion of the subject matter of your query and not legal warning. Local laws or your unique situation may change the common rules. For a specific answer to your question you should consult trial counsel with whom you can discuss adjectives the facts of your case. **
at the age of 1 or 2 if the court deem the child of sufficient maturity to respond and apprehend the questions posed.
At what age the child may determine where on earth they want to live is up to the discretion of the court EXCEPT in Georgia where on earth, by statute (law) a child of 14 has the permitted right to select with which parent they will (may) live.
Have you ever smoked cannabis?
If so do you smoke it on a regular basis?Answers: I used to smoke an ounce a week of hash, and occasionally skunk, and needed it to find to sleep at night. I construe that an ounce a week is quite an ill amount, though I suspect there are various who would boast to have smoked abundant times that much. I found that when I was first getting into cannabis, (I be 13-14) I got much more delight from it. This, I later found out, be due to the small amounts. I stopped smoking it completely about 4 years ago, and never realised until something like 2 months after I stopped, how bad I in fact felt when I have been smoking it. I would never turn back to smoking it in a minute, although I had some great times on it. The best times be always when I hadnt have it for a while, was surrounded by good company, and simply had a tiny amount so have to be economical. The big bits of hash never really brought much happiness at adjectives.
Yeah I used to be a regular pot head
But later I grew up
ihave and i will again, but i wouldnt make a way of it, moderation is the key
What is the punishment of wanton endangerment in the first amount and other felonies within ky?
my boyfriend got contained by a serious car wreck and is charged near wanton endangerment in the first level of a minor and unauthorized use of a vehicle which he says he have had past. we live in ky and he have a good legal representative but doesn't know when he is going to court yet. He say he will go to detain for the rest of his life is this true? What are the punishments of these felony?Answers: Wanton Endangerment is a Class D felony that carries a cost range of 1-5 years contained by Kentucky.
Unauthorized Use of a motor vehicle is a Class A misdemeanor. . .so up to 365 days.
If he doesn't have any prior felony, he will most likely not dance to jail. It is possible that he will be capable of get both of the charges settled for misdemeanors (I'm assuming he hasn't be to court at all yet). Without any prior felony, he will most likely bring probation even if he does get convicted of a felony.
Juvenile Convicted of a Level 9 Felony for Shoplifting?
What is the punishment for a juvenile convicted of a Level 9 Felony for shoplifting -- 3 different stores within a 72 hour period? The minor surrounded by question is 15 and this is a first offense.Answers: It is strange that a juvenile would facade that conviction unless he was tried as an developed.
Our "justice" system is pretty confused. They don't hesitate to avow a juvenile criminal an adult but without doubt refuse to aver anyone under 18 as competent to make an informed ruling about sex.
Has he/she be convicted, or just charged?
Prosecutors charge illustrious to leave room for negotiation. The system is set up to try and coerce you into pleading to substandard charges thus keeping cases out of the court system. Does the child have a advocate?
And I agree with another answerer, our world is completely screwed up when alike courts that state 15 year olds can never consent to sex, can be charged as adults for shoplifting.
So which is it America? Are they hoary enough to know better, or not out-of-date enough to trade name adult decision?
Cause they obviously cannot be both.
A civil suit show cause that carrys up to 12 mos do I own the right to a court appointed attorney?
Answers: Generally, no. The 6th admendment right to cousel only appiles to criminal matter. The rule is that it only applies to civil matter that amount to criminal sanctions.
So in that are some rare cases where on earth a government civil motion might be found to be effectively a criminal action, surrounded by which case the right would attach, but those are undercooked.
You mention: Carries up to 12 months. If this is civil confinement, then the right to attaches, since it amounts to a criminal sanction (I can't take back the case).
Civil suits are for money and property, they carry no penal complex time!
More Questions and Answers:
[1370] - [1673] - [1167] - [2163] - [2520] - [1397] - [274] - [272] - [2190] - [1478] - [1255] - [352] - [1817] - [629] - [1936] - [1963] - [1283] - [200] - [1301] - [67]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: