Law Questions and Answers

Why are Tobacco taxes continuously raised while Liquor taxes remain relatively steady?

A adjectives reason for sophisticated tobacco taxes is, "This will help prevent children from starting." Another is, "This money will repay for anti smoking education and programs." The reality is, they do neither and are excuses to fill the treasury near easy money. Alcohol is a executioner also. Not very copious families break up over smoking, but Alcohol is a overriding cause of domestic incompatability. Nobody ever kille a family unit on the highway because he had too much tobacco!
Answers: I craving I had an answer for your incredibly appropriate question.

I need I had thought of it.

The just answer I can think of is because more politicians drink than smoke.

Is nearby a better reason than that?
Tobacco have yet to hold any proven benefits to human kind. Even its second mitt smoke has proven perilous to people and children who don't smoke. Smokers enjoy dropped ashes on themselves in cars or bed and Killed innocent people.

Alcohol within moderation has be proven beneficial to people. Alcohol will exterminate the alcoholic but if the alcoholic follows the laws of the country he will not slay anyone else. Unfortunately Alcoholics make unpromising decisions because of the alcohol and do eradicate people. For the most module alcohol prices are much higher than cigarette prices(it take 2 drinks for an average woman and 3 drinks for an average man to be over the legal limit). Beer prices that would be 5 to 8 dollars. I believe you procure 20 cigarettes for 6 dollars.
Because the amount of people who drink far outweigh the amount of relations who use tobacco. Right now the U.S. is on a huge anti-smoking see and it makes those who dont smoke, but arent any healthier (most of them anyways), discern better about themselves. The U.S. parliament and state governments are competent to make a bunch of money by attacking a minority group when they attack tobacco. Remember prohibition? Thats why they don't attack alcohol too much. They lately leave it alone. If the FDA and the surgeon common really wanted to lend a hand out they would just look into making it not permitted. The truth of the matter is though alot of these state government who are upping the antes have nought but $$$ in their eyes.

My kid gets hit by vehicle not serouse to go to hospital?

Files a report the subsequent day ,police tell him they cant do anything about it, they have a licence plate # they even discribe . Car hits him and leaves, my kid is a 20 yeare old i know what does turn with them at age? how ever this is a hit an run and police violate his civil rights. What do you think this kid should do he is sore from the coup¨¦ hit and he is also recovering from a brocken leg 3 month ago.
Answers: First, I wouldn't dare go far adequate to claim that this is a violation of his "civil rights" unless you're gifted of immediately determining which of his civil rights is human being violated by the police failing to take achievement, and you can locate the laws affording him those civil rights.

Secondly, if he's hit by a saloon . . . he should have gone to the hospital whether he thought he be seriously injured, nor not . . . unless he's a physician (at 20 years old I seriously doubt it), later he's not really qualified ot make that result.

He CAN file an affidavit beside the police, and if they fail to arrest the man (or, go wrong to investigate) he can file an affidavit near the court, which can issue a warrant for the man's arrest . . . but, there would own to be some sort of evidence (like a medical report, or a police report from immediately following the incident).

If adjectives else fails, he can see an attorney.

If he be hit by a car, he should hold witnesses . . . there should be somebody contained by the area who saw it -- he'll requirement to be able to identify those associates.

Why, oh why on Earth, would you ever think it's ok to get hold of hit by a car, and not see a physician?
If it wasn't serious within is no damage to the saloon, I assume no witnesses, how could you prosecute it ? .
Was there more to the story I wonder?
I'm not sure of the authority issues, but if he's sore from the hit he should defintely get checked out, whether he go to a walkin-clinic, family doctor or the hospital. With motor accidents and such, the majority of the time, dull pain and discomfort won't set in for a few hours to a few days. Best to seize it checked out, just to be on the past the worst side.
He's not a minor and will have to purloin care of it himself. What does his civil rights own to do with it? The tenet is the law regardless of your see, I'm tired of hearing nearly civil rights!
Ultimately, it is the prosecutor's office who decide whether or not to pursue charges. If a police report was file, he might be able to acquire help from funds for victims of crimes. It might aid to get an attorney.
pinch him to the hospital because just surrounded by case you enjoy to file a serious claim you want to enjoy hard proof if you or your kid have an injury and you can get that from a hospital definatally
I'd see if you could find out who the cars owner is and sue.

Freind has minor son whose dad hasn't have any contact with him for 4 months very soon. He does have child support

taken out of his check when he'll work. They live within Wisconsin. Can she go after him for desertion?
Answers: As a single Mom I am glad to own the child support. If he doesn't want anything to do with the child, how economically do you think he will treat the child when they are together?

It is easier to capture a bee with honey than vinegar ... try anyone nice and keeping the lines of communication open. If everything turns obnoxious the man may just disappear .. after there go her child support, too.
I think if the dad is paying child support later no. it's a crappy situation to be in.

Would requiring kids to wear seat belts contained by a school bus be Democratic or Rebuplican?

To require kids to wear form belts in conservatory buses be considered a law from the democratic or rebuplican viewpoint?
Answers: In my country- Portugal it's already required to do so. But it was difficult because the transportation contained by school buses is within most cases made by private companies that have contracts beside schools, and they lobbied violently to not to have to spend money fitting form belts to their buses. It's a basic safekeeping measure, unlike a previous answer that said it is precarious, it's not. It can save lives. most buses own serious accidents in need turning over and it protects the children, and if it does turn over the seat belts protect them from bash their heads or breaking their neck when they fall, or even breaking their spine if the bus rolls over. As for the blood going to their team leader, so what? Do you think it's more risky than bashing your pave the way in the roof of the bus? I hope, for your kids sake, that a developed country approaching the USA takes this historic measure contained by road safety. Kids are the adjectives, and the future requests to be protected.
This is probably something that could go any way. I can't see various democrats or republicans who would disagree with a deep safety precaution for children similar to this

So the answer is: both
Um, it could go any way.. however, the decree is really stupid. If the bus flips, everyone is upside down hanging, and blood rushes to their skipper and they could possibly slip out and hang themselves accidentally.

I'm Republican, so I guess the statute would be for Democrats.
Neither, it would be common sense. The present need of seat belts surrounded by school buses is irresponsible.
But the requirement is more plausible to happen as a result of Democratic elected official responding to parental concern.
It might be a lifesaving move and it doesn't matter where on earth that sort of regulation comes from. It would be safer for the kids and would make go a lot easier for the bus driver.
There arent seatbelts on buses because numerous studies enjoy shown there is no call for and regular lap belts in need the shoulder part are terrifying. Seatbelt laws contained by general are big command, nanny state democrat laws. Do what you want, but dont give an account me what to do- the definition of freedom-
Being British this question of late highlights how stupid Americans really are.
How can the safety of a child be a political issue?
You want to carry a life and live contained by the real world, where on earth people are the most exalted things and children are a gift we should treasure, not put their lives up for political debate.
Neither. I hold a reliable source for the following information. It is 80 times less predictable that a child will die in a academy bus than in an automobile. Therefore it is adjectives for parents to give their kids a ride to college in inclement weather. The bus is safer. The rear legs of a seat within a school bus is designed to involve the energy of a forward collision surrounded by such a way as to eat up the possibility of being injured. However the unsystematic of knee injuries is superior. When seatbelts are in use the number of knees injuries go down dramatically but the risk of lead and neck injuries are glorious due to the way the body is held contained by place while the upper torso moves forward. Neck injuries can also be more deadly. Of course we are chitchat about a two point nouns belt. There are options available for three and four point harness that could be more effective for a childs safekeeping. These are not in use because they are more expensive. My view is one of many but instinctively I feel that two point form belts are just as unsafe as not wearing one at adjectives. If you want your kids to be even safer than they already are push for three point seatbelts. But they are pretty darn safe already contained by a schoolbus as long as they stay seated the way they are supposed to.

Sadly I enjoy to agree with Malcolm G. I am American and it make me sick that people focus that the cause of everything is any due to Republican or Democrats. If they both continue to do the stupid crap they've be doing we need to rejuvenate our leadership and agree to them know the reason why the are in that. To be public servants not power mongers.

Sue The School?

okay, well im a senior contained by high institution. i have a extreme math study disorder along with aspergers disorder, anxiety disorder and ADD, my math gift is only to 5th title level. i own been put contained by math classes that are way too concrete. im supposed to have backing in my math classes (yes they put me within two classes that i cannot pass) the problem is, im supposed to have relieve, but i was unobserved in class by 3 teacher when i needed help, they constantly walk by me and ignored me. they do this everyday when i ask for comfort. i am FAILING both classes and will not graduate this year because of this...i feel i hold been discriminated against. i will not be graduate, and i cannot get my GED because of the math fragment.is suing the answer?

btw-i have have countless meetings, advocate, and i DO have an IEP..and own been overlooked in the classroom. patently.
Answers: If your IEP is not being followed you may own a claim against the school, because the IEP is, within a sense, a contract to render services above and beyond what is afforded to the "regular" student.

I'd talk to an attorney in the region of the issue.
If you cant pass next how do you deserve a degree? Please explain it to me

The institution is not there to hold your foot and make sure you elapse your classes, how could you sue a school for your own stupidity?
I want to be a lifeguard at the coast, but I don't know how to swim and I can't learn. I should sue.

I want to be a football player for the NFL, but I single weigh 180 pounds and I'm not particularly capable at football. I should sue.

I want to cross the crocodile-infested river, but I can't read the sign that warns me nearly the crocodiles. I should sue the crocs for attacking me.

You seem to hold every label made up by psychiatrists trying to kind a buck convincing you of all these disorders. And I bet you haven't even rewarded any of them yet. But you're sure of a mind to use tham as an excuse.

Stop making excuses. If you're too incompetent to pass a GED, later you'll just hold to settle for being babysat for the rest of your vivacity.
marcx-ouch that was cruel-i give you a thumbs down

i dont think suing would help-than you would simply be the annoying kid who sued the school and the teacher would REALLY not wanna help you.
in actual fact not, talking to the principal will give support to. but u can still sue

Do you judge individuals?

If so what subject do you most like to sort out people on?
Answers: Of course I do. In everyday vivacity, I have to spawn judgements about population in how to business deal with them for adjectives transactions and activities. The simplest example is when someone isn't fascinated in traffic and cuts me bad. I can judge them as simply incompetent as drivers and distance myself, a bit than judge them as intentionally picking a brawl with me and getting out of my vehicle to deal near them. Another example is the store clerk who ignores me. I enjoy to judge whether to inform the clerk's organizer or simply find another clerk, all base upon whether I'm ignored due to insufficiency of attention or if it's rudeness that the clerk is working hard at.

We adjectives have to put together evaluations of our surroundings, and that evaluation is just another permanent status for judgement. And other people are fragment of our surroundings. If I'm at the bank ATM unpaid at night, and someone comes up losing me, I have to go-between whether he's a threat or just a bystander. In any case, I may be wrong contained by my evaluation, but I still need to do it.
Sometimes. For instance, I surmise OJ's guilty.

And he also committed that "hotel room invasion".
I dont like to referee a person perform all, you should adopt them the way near are.

Did you hear about the chicago police officer scandal?

This is newly terrible. This is approaching something out of a movie script. How the some of the chicago police force crush and tortured those accused of a crime. One of the go before officers even considered necessary to kill one of their officer from confessing. I believe it was out of the special operation unit. Like the movie next to Denzel Washington kind of item. I was contained by Chicago not to long ago too. We're suppose to trust these people. How can we in a minute after this?
Answers: That's a fairly foolish statement.

The actual number of crimes committed by the THOUSANDS of officer is TINY compared to the general public.

You are confusing word with authenticity. News is about the strange, the unusual. That's why you don't see ex-felons surrounded by the news for the thousands of crimes they commit every light of day.

Just police officers and priests.

How silly. Get for a time perspective, please.
Gee, I guess I better watch how I answer this or I'll return with
a yahoo reprimand again. Where does this NOT go on.
Cops/politicians=above the directive!
What's the big deal?

There's a drive we call this CROOK COUNTY.

lol.

You can thank our Teflon Mayor.
Yes. Police brutality is on a rise.

Two business law question? (multiple choice)?

A Metro City ordinance bans the Dutch auction of "violent video games: to minors. A court would feasible hold this ordinance to be

a. an unconsitutional restriction of speech.
b.consitutional under the First Amendment.
c. correct by the need to protect individual rights.
d. required to protect local interests.

Peter, an accountant for Excel Financial, Inc., attempts to applay the duty approach to ethical reasoning in conflicts that go down on the job. This approach is base on the idea that a party must

a. achieve the greatest pious for the most people.
b. avoid dishonourable behavior regardless of the consequences.
c. confrom to society's ethical standards.
d. place his or her employer's interest first.
Answers: Question 1 is probably D -- the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that local municipalities are able to determine what is obscene, because obscenity vary by population -- and that if something is deemed by a group to be obscene, it can be outlawed -- if you inevitability to verify this . . . check somewhere along the lines of Larry Flint v. Cincinnati or something.

I'm not sure at all going on for the second question, I'm not really sure what the duty rule is . . . but, I'd articulate it had something to do near an owed duty of care, within which case I would read aloud that it is either B (with a duty owed to his profession, and to the public) or D (with a duty owed to his employer).

If a person be raped, does that contaminate them with sin if it be forced against their will?

does sex really contaminate a person?

how is something unprocessed "a sin"?

how can rapists do this and still claim Christianity and be defended by Christians while the victims thrown out of the churches if they finger the abuser?
Answers: Sex between a man and his wife does not contaminate one with sin, a creature that has be raped has not committed a sin, they own a sin committed against them.

How is something that is pure "a sin", easy when this something unconscious is used outside of marriage, even if you are not married and you move about to a hooker, you are causing her to sin because she is selling her body.

Satan could claim to be a Christian, I know that Satan believes contained by Jesus Christ and he believes in God, does that build him a Christian? no it does not, unless you live and act approaching Jesus Christ as stated in the New Testament you can vote all that you want that you are Christian but you are not.

I know of no Christians that guard rapists and I no of no victims that have be thrown out of any church of any denomination for either identify or testifying against a rapist.

Your ask really brings out your ignorance about such things.
Sex simply contaminates if you get an STD contained by regular instances..not rape.
Rape is not natural!!
The world we live surrounded by is A** Backwards..that is why. The victims are not protected next to the laws while the rapist are...

Where on Earth and how on loam did that ever become O.K??
I'd say depends on the religion.

Although, ask any sane personality and they would say no.
Many religions own 'cleansing' rituals to fix this...
''how is something natural "a sin"...it isn't the victim's imperfection
nor sin...it' the attacker.
Rape is a crime. God punishes crime. When you force someone to have sex next to you against your will, how can it be natural? If a rapist however, confesses his sins to God and beg for forgiveness, God will forgive him.

What are your views on Justice Clarence Thomas?

Answers: He harrased that woman a moment ago like that orb player harassed that woman. Everyone wishes to say they didn't because the woman be viewed as hideous, but that is the exact women men will pick to harrass that opening when they complain, they can say "look at her, would you want her?" Everyone will right to be heard no, I think Clarence is a coward and a quip!
1. He is and always be radical, not ever liberal or conservative contained by his life.

2. He does not give attention to for himself very much at adjectives, from what I can tell. But possibly in attendance is much more to the man's mind I just haven't see yet. Even so, at this point I hold become comfortable with my doubts roughly that.

3. He votes the way he does because he seek approval. It is not conservative, but the Republicans found him useful. There is a great deal in his view I have no unadulterated disagreement with. But the man is not even proud of the diploma, that signifies the school experience he pursued. He found so much less approval than he expected when he come away with the point. He kept seeking approval. He is essentially a bitter man, who has some apt basic contentions to mitigate against some of the weak common and crude liberal approaches to unquestionable things, but it is perhaps catastrophic that he still seeks so much approval to this daylight.
I'm not sure he is quite as bright as one might reason, but then.. how does one know? How could I really say aloud such a thing and why should I want to try to confer it some kind of certitude?
The republicans had given his radicalness a towpath to approval when, soon after achieving exhibition, there appeared to him no where on earth else to turn to seek more approval.

-
To put it more rudely, he seem to have made himself irretrievably, again, a slave.

I would close to to see him think for himself. Other black conservatives do be in command of quite a bit, as I see it, to exhibit freedom to "think-for-one's.self".
In him, so far, I do not.

Justice Thomas is a radical's sweeping in a time when politics, adjectives the more routinely becomes hijack by pure radicalness for it's own sake.
My view is that Liberal activist like Clarence Thomas should be kicked past its sell-by date the supreme court, and maybe return with a job at a food court. We can one and only hope that Cheif Justice John Roberts can keep Thomas within check this year!

God Bless America!

More Questions and Answers:
[1450] - [2014] - [2064] - [2293] - [1644] - [260] - [710] - [2118] - [2536] - [2061] - [2108] - [2283] - [2367] - [1030] - [164] - [890] - [636] - [1692] - [1807] - [1827]

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

Answer question: