Law Questions and Answers

How many employment tenet cases happed in the cohesive states in 2006?

how masses employment law cases happed within the united states within 2006?
Answers: There's no way to detail. the first problem is the use of "happened" - what does that mean? Cases that resulted within demands? Cases that resulted in actual lawsuits human being filed?

The easiest, indeed, probably the just statistic, you could find would be the number of lawsuits. You'd have to jump state by state to see if the court systems track them by category... then achieve federal statistics, and do the math.

The problem is that here the category would most likely be contract - and few systems probably track by the word employment.

Pros and cons of banning handgun n the united states?

Answers: The most adjectives anti-banning arguements (and my response to each):

1. "They are needed for home protection" - Why do you need a handgun to protect your home? If I'm a burglar wouldn't the distinctive double click or a shotgun install more dismay (and do more damage).

2. "If you ban handgun then what's subsequent, banning hunting rifles?" - If you allow for handgun, shouldn't you allow for automatic weapons. If you allow for automatic guns, what about granade launchers? If granade launchers, why not anti-aircraft rockets? etc. etc. Give everyone the nuke. Slippery slopes arguements shift both ways. Most people who want to proscription handguns are not after rifles or shotguns. Its the reality that you can hide a handgun within your jacket that makes it so perilous.

3. "I can kill near a car, a butterknife or a lollipop stick. Are you going to proscription those too?" - A car is made for transportation, a butterknife is for spreading butter, a lollipop stick for holding your kid's lollipop. Handguns are the simply product in the US that if used correctly will snuff out another human being.

4. "If you engineer handguns bent the only populace with guns will be criminals." - What? Is that really an arguement. Why not allow crack cocaine to be official? That way solely the law abiding will use crack cocaine.

5. "I obligation a handgun to protect myself away from the home." - I have never carried a handgun surrounded by my life and I'm still alive and I've never be mugged. Crime is a problem in this country, but more populace are killed by involuntary shootings then by criminals attacking them. Guns are more treacherous to those you love then those who would do you mar.

6. "Some people use handgun for sport or recreation." - Fine, after leave your handgun at the recreation/sports club that you shoot at (just like they do within the UK).

7. "Crime rates go down within areas that allow handguns." - Yes, contained by areas that RECENTLY allowed handgun permits the crime rate did walk down. However, they did not go down as much as the national average. Plus, historically crime rates and casual shooting rates go up surrounded by areas that allow handguns. The most esteemed reason for this is that crimes of vehemence go passageway up when people hold a gun close by. They have no time to cool past its sell-by date and clear their heads.

8. "If you stoppage guns the government will be better competent to control you." - Really, like contained by most of Europe today, Japan, Canada? Living in horror is a great way to live a contented life.

9. "2nd Amendment" - A okay regulated militia, being crucial to the security of a free state, the right of the ethnic group to keep and carry arms, shall not be infringed. What in the world is powerfully regulated about the gun use contained by this country today? Those wack jobs within Montana that form their own militias are using their 2nd Amendment rights, not every person that owns a gun.

Needless to speak I'm very for handgun control. You inevitability to put a strict ban on it and rejection all sale and distribution. It will take a few decades previously all of the guns are gone, but it will work. Try to purchase a gun contained by Europe today...it's nearly impossible.

I do think you will the murder rate slop in the US if you exclude handguns. Getting your hand dirty with a run through (or lollipop) is different then the randomness of shooting a handgun.

Handguns are the with the sole purpose product sold in the US whose sole purpose is to shoot another human being.
There are no "pros" for violate the Constitution of the United State.

The "cons" are many --- you will own a police state in copy time.
The propaganda given by the anti gun activists are that gun control or ban will result in a lower crime rate. Nothing could be further from the truth.

If a burglar be to consider robbing one of three houses, but knew that the owner of two of the houses owned a handgun; which house would he be more potential to rob?

Most importantly, our founding fathers thought it be important ample to make it a constitutional right. There is no upside to deletion our right and ability to uphold ourselves.
Well, the pros would be along the line of actively preventing IDIOTS from obtain them.
The con would be the fact that we would be putting adjectives trust into our government to protect us. ALL of us. 24 hours a time 7 days a week 364 days a year. I don't think our administration cares something like our best interest now. I doubt they would assistance any more if we surrender our protection. I am not a republican, nor a democrat; but I believe there requests to be something we can do. I don't know if I want to live in a country that doesn't allow me to hold a gun if I may need one. A country that would overnight turn imperative abiding citizens into criminals.

Lets think give or take a few this.
I was born and raise in Miami. All the IDIOTS that I know in my wilder days obtain guns. These guns weren't obtained from a "impossible guy" dressed in leather on the sidewalk near a trunk full of illegal guns... These idiots broke into houses/apartments and STOLE these once "legal" guns, and in a few seconds of walking out of the house next to them, converted them into illegal guns. Then these unauthorized guns were used for anything they could justify using them for.
I consistency if we have a grounded more authentic view of how things REALLY work and transpire, we could construct alot of things wrong with our countries law alot better.
Criminals will have guns weather it's legally recognized or not. I am a law abiding citizen , the Constitution states that I can tolerate arms, my state laws uphold the constitution,and not a soul will take my gun from me. You entail to worry going on for the law breakers that enjoy guns, not a mother of two who wants to protect her house.
Basically, a law prohibition all US citizens from owning paw guns will affect ONLY law abiding citizens. Criminals will still enjoy hand guns and the rest of us will be defenseless against them.
If they are debar, the only family that will have them are cops and criminals and here are a lot more criminals than cops (and me) so you can slickly see where this is going. We're discussion about a great deal of dead civilians for no motivation at all.
Unlike the mindless propaganda spouted by the like of "Downriver Dave"...Or any of the other "Guns only are for massacre!" & "Let's be safe..Like Europe!" Pontificating Anti-Gunners.
I close to to live in actuality.You know that fun little place that is usually 180 degree opposite of the "Great Liberal Thinking" piles.

so, let us initiate...
I will print "Downriver Dave's" points..then show why he is incorrect.

(DD>)1. "They are needed for home protection" - Why do you obligation a handgun to protect your home? If I'm a burglar wouldn't the distinctive double click or a shotgun install more fear (and do more damage).

Actually, to anyone who know firearms, a handgun is what you use to fight your process back to the rifle, you shouldn't enjoy put down/or away in the first place. A shotgun, contrary to >HOLLYWOOD< legend(s)...Isn't what you want for home shelter... a QCB carbine is...and that isn't just my judgment...it is why Law enforcement & the military use them for "Clearing" buildings.Shotguns are used for "Breaching" doors...not shooting "Bad" guys.

(DD>)2. "If you ban handgun then what's subsequent, banning hunting rifles?" - If you allow for handgun, shouldn't you allow for automatic weapons. If you allow for automatic missiles, what about granade launchers? If granade launchers, why not anti-aircraft rockets? etc. etc. Give everyone the nuke. Slippery slopes arguements jump both ways. Most people who want to ruling out handguns are not after rifles or shotguns. Its the reality that you can hide a handgun contained by your jacket that makes it so perilous.

This one has 2 different false hoods surrounded by it. The first, is that if one "Allows" one type of weapon, why not say "anything go?"
He asks "Why not automatic weapons?"...Well, I revulsion to be the one to break the new to you skippy...But they >HAVE< be legal...since 1934! Given the money, I can travel buy one today.many, masses people already enjoy.so you lose that one.and The 2nd amendment was written to guarantee the people's right to hang on to and bare "Individual" or foot weapons...not "Crew served" or "squad served" arms...so that individuals would have their primary "Fighting" military capability at hand surrounded by times of need.

In his second cut, he states that "Most people who want to prevention handguns are not after rifles or shotguns."
That my friends is P-U-R-E >B.S.<
Asked >Before< the walkway of the Brady Anti-Gun bill, Sarah Brady said "We only want to attain the handguns sour the street!"..Asked just after it's lane..."It's a good >START<!"
Anti-gunners, are...ANTI-GUN! length!.

(DD>)3. "I can kill beside a car, a butterknife or a lollipop stick. Are you going to command those too?" - A car is made for transportation, a butterknife is for spreading butter, a lollipop stick for holding your kid's lollipop. Handguns are the merely product in the US that if used correctly will destroy another human being.

So a Sword, Spear, Battle Axe, and anything else used >BEFORE< the gun..made population somehow "Less" dead?
What!...People never figure out how to kill eachother untill the gun?
Sorry!...People Have, Do, and Will verbs to kill eachother. In the pre-gun era...10's or 100's of thousands might die contained by a single battle. If by some tricks spell we could suddenly make adjectives of the guns, and every bit on knowledge on their construction dissapear over darkness..people would still slay other people.PERIOD!

(DD>)4. "If you spawn handguns iffy the only folks with guns will be criminals." - What? Is that really an arguement. Why not allow crack cocaine to be legally recognized? That way single the law abiding will use crack cocaine.

It is officially recognized to protect ones self. It is legal to protect this country..from ALL threats..foreign and domestic.
Last time I checked Crack wasn't legal...
Laws do not deter criminals, because crominals...by definition don't observe the law.therfore the simply people who will follow/obey the gun ban(s) are the really people we don't enjoy to worry in the order of in the first place...Savvy?

(DD>)5. "I obligation a handgun to protect myself away from the home." - I have never carried a handgun within my life and I'm still alive and I've never be mugged. Crime is a problem in this country, but more citizens are killed by involuntary shootings then by criminals attacking them. Guns are more chancy to those you love then those who would do you wound.

I have never needed a seatbelt, a fire extinguisher, or a smoke alarm...therfore, by your logic..they are adjectives unneeded items and should be removed from everyones homes...right?
WRONG!..like these items..it is better to own one (and know how to use it properly) and >NOT< need it...later to need it, and >NOT< hold it. Discovering that one need a weapon to shield one's self...when one needs to guard one's self..is a discovery that has come too behind time.
ALSO...the statistic you're using to quote the old "The gun is more potential to be used on you than a bad guy"..have been proved to be utterly false...acording to the government's crime statistics..but they merely do this stuff for a living..what do they know...right?

(DD>)6. "Some people use handgun for sport or recreation." - Fine, next leave your handgun at the recreation/sports club that you shoot at (just like they do contained by the UK).

Great idea..NOT! Like be stated above..when you need it...it person miles away locked in a protected isn't going to do you a bit of good.
And you are going to want to check out the UK's destructive crime statistics >BEFORE< you suggest them as a model of what we would be in for if your anti-gun accepted wisdom went contained by to effect here...I'll give you a connotation...their violent crime is rising exponetialy..and their are more wrong guns there afterwards ever.Austrailia too!

(DD>)7. "Crime rates go down surrounded by areas that allow handguns." - Yes, within areas that RECENTLY allowed handgun permits the crime rate did step down. However, they did not go down as much as the national average. Plus, historically crime rates and totally unplanned shooting rates go up surrounded by areas that allow handguns. The most substantial reason for this is that crimes of agitation go process up when people enjoy a gun close by. They have no time to cool bad and clear their heads.

Again, not according to EVERYONE who studies this munificent of thing...outside of the Anti's groups that is to say.Read the book "More guns-less crime".or any of the government reports more or less this stuff...there are at most minuscule 8-10 out there.

(DD>)8. "If you exclusion guns the government will be better competent to control you." - Really, like contained by most of Europe today, Japan, Canada? Living in terror is a great way to live a festive life.

Show me one time >ANYWHERE< within history, when the government disarms it associates...and things improve...or freedom reigns...You can't...because it never does.
Or should I permit someone else have a say-so on it..

"When the resolution of enslaving America be formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament be advised by an artful man, who be governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it be the best and most effectual track to enslave them; but that they should not do it visibly, but weaken them, and consent to them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of very soon of the whole ancestors, except a few public officers. But I cannot speak who will be the militia of the future morning. If that paper on the table get no alteration, the militia of the future light of day may not consist of all classes, soaring and low, and rich and poor... - George Mason, Virginia Constitution Convention"

(DD>)9. "2nd Amendment" - A well regulated militia, individual necessary to the indemnity of a free state, the right of the people to save and bear arms, shall not be infringed. What contained by the world is well regulated roughly speaking the gun use in this country today? Those wack job in Montana that form their own militias are using their 2nd Amendment rights, not every soul that owns a gun.

Who should I quote for this one.How about this guy..he might enjoy something good to vote.

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent surrounded by the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at adjectives times armed." --Thomas Jefferson

It's almost too easy..


"Are we at closing brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted near arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms contained by possession and under our direction, and have them under the supervision of Congress? If our defense be the real reason of having those arms, within whose hands can they be trusted next to more propriety, or equal safety to us, as contained by our own hands? - Patrick Henry"

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm solely those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws engineer things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to uplift than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. - Thomas Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764"

"Today, we obligation a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to clutch arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the unfinished purpose of their daily existence and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom. – John F. Kennedy"

"To disarm the family is the best and most effectual passageway to enslave them. – George Mason"

They adjectives "Get it"...why is it so hard for others to grasp?

T.S.

ARFCOM, We run the Interweb!
Pros: Less murder, less casual murder (such as children getting control of a gun), much harder to commit robbery

Cons: The anger of people who don't want to contribute up their unnecessary guns.

I was taken for an 8 year ride by my programmer. Do I own any legal recourse?

I hired a programmer for the recent past 8 years and he has no vanished me for greener pastures. However he have left me contained by quite a bind as plentiful of his started projects are left shortened. He also did my web site which have many issues and error messages cropping up, and inoperative they way he promised. His attitude is that if it works 90% of the time than it's ok. Or if at hand is a problem it must be the users stupidity, etc. He has vanished me holding the bag. I trusted him to do what he promissed but what he promissed be just a big slouch to continue getting a earnings check.
I have every email he as ever sent me. Many are riddled next to excuses and threats or promises that he never lived up to.
Do I have any legally recognized recourse? Can he be sued for not living up to end of the agreement?
Answers: Did you enjoy a contract that stipulated the conditions of his employment?? Since you continued to pay him (I assume) throughout his tenure, you official his work. Did you document your dissatisfaction and the consequences of its continuance?? What HE sent you is only 1/2 of the story. What be YOU telling HIM??
I realize you're upset over the situation, one left beside software that doesn't work very in good health and is not documented. There are a lot of low-quality programmers surrounded by the world and you may have hired one.

The answer to your query depends upon whether he was an member of staff or you contracted him for services. You would then enjoy to examine what was contracted and what be delivered. If he be an employee, you're out of luck. If you remunerated Social Security taxes for him, he was your hand. If you withheld Income Taxes, he was your member of staff.

Your only recourse for an member of staff that does not fulfill his or her job description is to abandon employment. You can't sue an employee for incompetence or anticlimax to live up to your standards of excellence.
I will fix it for you..contact me by email.

What could the attorneys actually deliver to you no business how good they are?

I cost smaller number then the great attorneys you will have need of, and in the expiration you will have a working site and programs.

Contact me by email.

Does this address of this person exist??? Post Bank PLC?

they sent me as they claim i won a lottery near a very VERY big prize and i entail to know whether they exist, esp, if someone lived in the nouns and knows that place quit ample.
pleaaaase i need a fundamentally quick answer.
thanx



POST BANK PLC :
61 Queen St, London, EC4R 1AF, UK
Contact Person: Mr. Jürgen Ebert,
Online Banking Division,
Tel: +44 703 590 0344
+44 703 184 5860
Email: jurgenebert@accountant.com
Answers: These are ALWAYS scam. Don't contact them!

Go to Google and type in Post Bank Scam, and see what you return with back.

Or type within 419 Scam, and Post Bank and see what you get final.

If it's too good to be true, it is!
It's a scam. subsequent, you will be asked for your personal banking information or sent a check to change and send them rear a portion of the amount. The check will bounce and you will be responsible for it. I have included a website that deal with this.

www.fakechecks.com
It's a scam. Ignore them.

Richard

What was the social guarantee act?

relieve please
Answers: Besides the monetary reasons, another mode for them to keep track of you.
the channel our government steals our not easy earned money.


Mike...

Is it not about time goverments legilse adjectives drugs and stop indriectly funding the crimnal underworld?

Come on guys i guess it is time goverments legalise all drugs and stop indirectly funding bombs to eradicate our citizens in the form of terrorists. We will never rid the planet of drug treat roughly, the victorians used to smoke opium all the time, (rumour have it thats why they were so ashy the rich that is ) and cocaine be legal not so long ago.( Used for dentistry) If we legalise this and start taxing it afterwards we will cut billions of pounds profit from terroists cells, training camp, criminal underworld gang and organised crime?
Answers: While I think that the message to Americans should be clear that Drugs are extremely negative and that you should never do them, I do think that their use and posession should NOT be criminalized so that the immense amount of money that is withered prosecuting these poor lost souls could be used in a more efficient anti-drug way.
Have you clearly thought through this concept?

Personally, I do not see anything wrong next to decriminalization of all drugs. I would not want the state to "legalize" them since that would come near a vast bureaucracy which would front to quality control --- implied contracts of safekeeping, insurance damages for people who catch dead due to them.

You do own a point that our current "law enforcement" does nil more that fix the floor price of street drugs and increases the role of government surrounded by the lives of the people. The bazaar for drugs has increased because general public are not responsible for their own health. This is governmental aggravated burglary from those that do not use drugs and seek to stay wholesome.
The government is not nearly to take a paycut legalize drugs that line tons politicians pockets. Dont be so gullible.

Do you think the folks that want to legalize drugs are impossible to tell apart people that want to prohibition cigarettes?

As a conservative, it seems to me that the folks that want to legalize drugs are adjectives the hippy liberals. It also seems to me that adjectives the 'ban smoking' populace are liberals too. Does this mean that here is a divide among liberals or is it hypocracy?
Answers: The main argument to both is personal choice and the rights of others.

You can and should be capable of personally choose to smoke no business how stupid it is for your health. You should NOT be capable of force your smoking on others with second paw smoke. (personally I think it should be considered child maltreat to smoke with children surrounded by your car or home, but thats me).

You should be capable of smoke pot no matter how stupid the choice is for your form..but that doesn't mean you should know how to inflict it on others.

As Tax and spend liberals...we want to legalize it to rates the crap out of it to spend $ on treatment and prevention programs.
1) There is a difference between banning cigarettes and prohibition the smoking of cigarettes in public places where on earth secondhand smoke can and will cause lung cancer and other respiratory system deficiency.
2) Let's not engage surrounded by hyperbole here: It's legalized marijuana, not all drugs. And if they be legalized I'm sure they would be put under alike scrutiny as cigarettes considering their awful smell and potential side effects to others in public
3) Liberals are not monolithic and I of course hope that all conservatives aren't any.
4) True hypocrisy:
-Pro-life but pro-death penalty and pro-war and ill-fatedly this defines various conservatives.
-2 Trillion for stupid unnecessary war= YEAH
-35 Billion to extend SCHIP- no, too expensive

I hurt my back whilst at work must my boss settle up me sick pay?

i hurt my pay for at work and since have have to go on sick, i hold been told that my boss does not and have never paid sick take-home pay,is it right that he does not have to reward sick pay?and where on earth do i stand now as i own lost my income.i do pay national insurance on my wages.
Answers: Since you mention national insurance I assume you are within the UK. In the US businesses are required to carry Workmans Compensation insurance which pays adjectives expenses when an employee is injured. This includes element of their pay. Is here something like that surrounded by the UK?
Yes, in the US "sick pay" is something a few, mostly massive companies offer, surrounded by addition to "personal days" and "break days"
Workers Compensation is mandatory if you have 5 or more body. It is partially state-funded and will discharge your medical bills for documented, work related illness or injury.
It also pays a small portion of your income or average, hourly pay.
shift to the citizen advice center you should find 6 months pay !

Shipped eBay item on Monday, customer says she hasn't received it?

I sent it through the post organization, so there's no tracking number. She didn't request insurance or shipping confirmation. If this product never arrives, whose fault is it?

It be a $25 item that shipped for $2.32. I do have my post department receipt.
Answers: As a Ebayer I can relate you for fact two reason why you always use a tracking system for shipments.
1-people will claim they did not receive it and procure two for one.
2-people will out you on ebay and no one will direct from you. Do not underestimate the power that complainers have when they can post nearly how they did not receive items. Over half the ebay consumers check the remarks of others who ordered from you prior to order from you theirselves.
Always send things next to tracking numbers, because if they don't arrive it's your responsibility. Although sometimes the mail can help yourself to up to a week. My bank is exactly two blocks from my Post Office Box, but every piece of communication they send me is stamped from seven days before. Give it a few more days, and if it still hasn't arrived, you may have to discount her money. Just call it an expensive lesson.

I was not long involved in a road viciousness incident I was assaulted for no adjectives reason?

what I want to know is where on earth can I get a bull hotel for a vauxhall astra so if this kind of entry happens again I can of late run the bastard over instead of stopping to avoid hitting him
If I had a bull pole I would not do any serious damage to my vehicle but the violent bastard who is trying to injure me would obtain what he deserves
Answers: Judging by the tone of your question it would not surprise me if you be also an aggressive driver.
So have you asked why this party had road strength against you? Do you drive way to swiftly over the speed limit or agency to slow under the speed hamper? Do you tailgate? Do you cut in and out of traffic to acquire ahead?
I hate tailgaters so when they are bringing up the rear me riding my bumper I wash my window which makes them put money on off. Also don't drive surrounded by the fast lane unless you are ratification another car.
How come when you speak to anyone involved within an incident on the road they are other completely blameless.

More Questions and Answers:
[2180] - [1362] - [165] - [346] - [2021] - [1253] - [156] - [1322] - [1141] - [327] - [2317] - [728] - [1237] - [2001] - [2564] - [2378] - [1578] - [1482] - [1264] - [697]

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

Answer question: