Law Questions and Answers
Can public schools ruling out items with sugar within a child's sack lunch? Our's prohibits cookies etc on the grounds.
I can understand revamping arts school luches, no candy, or cupcakes during parties etc. but can they lawfully tell me I can't put a cookie within my second grader's luch?Answers: Even in today's world where on earth it seems that every aspect of parenting is outsiders' business, what YOU want to feed your children is your business. Personally, I'd distribute whatever I chose, and relay the school to mind their own business. I've hear of schools trying to forbid a parent from sending their kids a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, cuz a classmate be allergic to peanuts. Didn't work then, shouldn't vary for a cookie. If the school pushes this, database suit on your own for interfering with your parental rights.
Yes. They can.
EDITED TO ADD:
I suggest anyone who posts the conservatory cannot do so study the premis of in loco parentis.
Good for them!
We hold a generation of children who are growing up obese. Sugary snack are factor of the problems.
Most kids love fruit pieces (not roll-ups filled next to HF corn syrup), raisins, applesauce cups, yogurts or cups of fat free pudding. I'm sure that you can find a substitute for that cookie.
They do hold the right to regulate what goes within your child's lunch, and I hope that you will embrace that policy in the interest of your child's robustness both now and surrounded by the future
I enjoy never heard of this beforehand, check your state board of Education rules.
Good luck.
Do it and find out.
Or, save your moral outrage for something earth-shattering. After all, at the ending of the day, your kid is well again. If you want to complain to the government, ask them how they lost 2.3 trillion dollars...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rRqeJcuK...
The singular way this would be criminal would be if they specifically said only 'your' child cannot enjoy a cookie because they are obese..this would be discriminating against a recognized disability. (Although I argue on corpulence being considered a disability - but I won't jump there for presently.)
A cookie is not a "right". As someone else said - save your indignation and outrage for truly key issues that relate directly to your child's education -- plus this offer you a chance to instruct your child that sweets are not he best food selection for a treat.
Wake up! Where hold you been? The public arts school system is a government entity. The teacher unions are comprised of liberal, do gooders who don't believe you enjoy the ability to do what's right for your children. The public school will do whatever they need has long as the majority sits vertebrae and lets it occur.
I think it shows their double standard when some school contract Pizza Hut & McDonalds to bring in arts school lunches.
Yes they can.
Lets see - the high school need money so they allow Coke and Pepsi to put vending machines contained by the schools and parents are outraged because of the childhood chubbiness problem. So, high school take out the vending machines and lose the source of revenue.
Elementary college tries to encourage fitting student health and address the child flabbiness problem and say no cookies surrounded by lunch and parents are outraged because now their child can't grasp a sugar fix in the middle of the time.
Geez.
Suck it up - the school is looking our for your child's vigour. (Although, it does make the food trades no where on earth near as much fun "I'll trade you my apple for your fleshy free granola".)
Just start sending your kid to school next to a fat free pudding and collect the cookie for the after school snack.
Isn't time we raise the white flag on the period of war on drugs?
It's a Fact we have lost this time of war. Isn't it time to return to common sense basically like they did during prohibition. Look, I detest drugs, I've never used them and I think 99.5% of everyone else don't use drugs except from a doctor. The People who want to verbs pouring billions of dollars into enforcement and spend addtional BILLIONS on locking people up (some 70% of put inside population) say that if "WE ALLOW" inhabitants to put what they want into "THEIR" own bodies we will turn into a drug addicted country...notice they never administer facts...just upsetting predictions based on nought. The people who don't do frugs (99.99%) of use will verbs not too (my shocking prediction) and the people who want to smoke, clutch drugs will continue to do so (common sense). The difference would be this: Billions save each year from enforcement (that doesn't work) and housing population in prison. Drug dealer will go out of business DAY 1#. Drug theory test on the job sunshine 1#, Tax revenues UP, tax expense's DOWN.Answers: Totally agree though it doesn't hold to be a white flag.
There's no crime in drug use. Crime is (should be) overexploit to persons or their properties and the drug users simply damage themselves. Some are criminals and those should be prosecuted. All the others are mortal punished for crimes that they may eventually commit according to statistics (that show that only a small percentage of drug users commit felonies).
"We could also release Billions if we raise the "white" flag on Cancer?"
No doubt in the region of it. The market place should be taking perfectionism of this. The results would be much much better and the cost would be pay from profits and voluntary contributions. Today, the results are poor and the cost are rewarded by everyone (regardless of your willingness to contribute to it) next to money taken at gun point (taxes).
"We could also save Billions if we angle the "white" flag on Starvation in Third World Countries?
Same as previous beside a twist. Most plans to back starved people around the world are holding them within camps. It doesn't business the reason, their habitat varying or being pushed away by period of war. The point is that after one generation or two living surrounded by camps beside URBAN EDUCATION they have no place to step. They've been in that doing nothing to survive for a long time. They've lost the skills to live contained by their own environment and there's no place for them in urban environments. But it feel nice from a socialist urban perspective to send them money while condemning them to cultural extinction.
"We could also put aside Billions if we raise the red "white" on aids.."
Same as previous
"Get the point?"
Yes, I grasp the point. I understand that no event how "important" the issue is, how "transcendental ", how "human", how "emotional", it's always in the region of the use of resources.
Resources are not free, it takes thorny work and dedication to get them. We take our resources through our labor and deserve to keep them and use them as respectively of us see fit.
XXX is your issue? The private sector is working on it, it's going to work a lot better short government regulations and intervention. You are free to turn and voluntarily contribute to it. You'll get more merit for your dollar and the issues are going to be taken care of.
But don't you dare describing me what to do with my unyielding earned money.
Why put on a pedestal the white flag?
There is no war at hand!
The drug cultivation imposed by the Brits in asia is the making of the Western Civilization.
Anywhere you jump I bet you will find the Brit fingers in promoting Drug use, and cultivation.
We could also retrieve Billions if we raise the red flag on Cancer.
We could also set free Billions if we raise the red flag on Starvation within Third World Countries.
We could also save Billions if we elevate the red flag on aids..
Get the point?
ADDED BASED ON RESPOMSE:
Typical druggie response. Give me what I want and don't argue with me.
Seems you don't want to hear anything but what you already construe is right. So what's the point?
Far too many powerful relations are making way too much money keeping drugs forbidden, and pretending to wage a war against them for it to money.
It would require a massive shift in the attitude of nation in this country. After one bombarded with anti-drug propaganda within this country for so many generation, the majority are completely convinced that we HAVE to keep war the 'war on drugs', which is a time of war that can never be won. It is simple demand side economics. If within is a demand, someone will provide a supply. All keeping drugs unendorsed does is keep the prices big, and generate more crime, as addicts rob and steal to hold on to themselves high.
Not surprisingly, most of duplicate people that support 'staying the course' surrounded by the war on drugs fell for Dubya's b.s. 'period of war on terror', after pulling all but a handful of troops out of Afghanistan (where opium poppy production is out of control) and sending them into Iraq to invade, occupy, and immediately to serve as referees and bullet/IED catchers within the middle of a civil war, we are very soon generating more sympathy and recruits for fright groups, along with more anti-american sentiment worldwide.
I don't see a solution any time soon, but adjectives I know is the status quo is totally f**ked.
Answer: I agree...One War that would be "Won" by doing what the democrats did to me in '72...
Declare feat and quit! Were it not for the fact that administration entities collect So Much Revenue that this train of greed on both sides will never stop.
Have you Heard?~ Mychal Bell is Free!!!!! YIPEE!!!?
Today they freed Mychal Bell and dropped all Adult charges!!!However his struggle isn't over b/c they still want to prosecute him as a Juvenille!!!!
Should we still turn to Jena and Protest?
I say Hell YES!!!
This is far from over
Answers: I say aloud HELL YESSSS too, i'll meet you nearby...lol
you are kidding!
Legislative Activity - South Carolina (Death Penalty)?
With which current issues does South Carolina legislation deal?What legislative decision have be made in South Carolina since the year 2000? Is in that any pending legislation? Describe the legislation.
What is your judgment of the legislation you identified?
Answers: South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry have signed into ruling legislation that allows proseuctors to seek the departure penalty for repeat child molesters. The alien South Carolina law allows a loss sentence if the accused have been twice convicted of raping a child younger than 11-years-old. It also sets a 25-year mandatory minimum prison sentence for some sex offender, mandates that populace convicted of criminal sexual conduct in the first scope wear an electronic monitoring device, and requires registered sex offenders to update their address every six months. The Oklahoma index makes the extermination penalty an likelihood for anyone convicted of a second or subsequent conviction for rape, sodomy, or lewd molestation involving a child under 14. Oklahoma, South Carolina, Montana, Louisiana, and Florida are the lone states to allow the death cost for certain sex crimes. No one convicted of a sex offense have been executed since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the wherewithal punishment 30 years ago. David Bruck, a law professor at Washington and Lee University, said the measures might certainly put child rape victims' lives at risk. He notes, "The concluding message you want to give an criminal who has the go of a child in his hand is you might as well snuff out the child because he'd already got the release penalty. This is a terrifically stupid message." (Associated Press, June 8, 2006 and June 9, 2006). See Recent Legislative Activity. The constitutionality of the law is not clear because the U.S. Supreme Court have ruled that the death cost for rape of an adult is expelled by the Eighth Amendment. (Coker v. Georgia (1977)).
In South Carolina, lawmakers own abandoned a legislative provision that would own allowed the death cost for sex offenders convicted a second time of assaulting children younger than 11 years outmoded. Legislators in the South Carolina House eliminate the proposal because it likely would own prevented a broader sex offender bill from endorsement through the legislature before the General Assembly adjourn on June 1. Opponents of the death cost provision have said the state would frontage hefty legal bills to shelter the law and that notable the death cost on this class of offenders would furnish them no incentive to spare their victims' lives. (Associated Press, May 21, 2006).
South Carolina Bill To Expand Death Penalty Draws Criticism
A bill to expand South Carolina's capital punishment statute so that those who are convicted a second time of raping children underneath 11 are eligible for the death cost has drawn criticism from those who verbs the bill may result in unintended consequences. Fears that the legislation will organize to family member refusing to come forward about intra-family offenses and that it may also result in more rape victims human being killed are among the chief concerns on the subject of the proposed legislation. The bill has be approved by the South Carolina Senate and will soon be considered by legislators in the House. Kent Scheidegger, permissible director of the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation surrounded by California, said that a state shouldn't impose the destruction penalty for twice convicted sex offender "simply to give the rapist an incentive not to eradicate the victim." DPIC Executive Director Richard Dieter agreed, totalling, "It may actually create more passing because the person facing the release penlaty for this kind of offense might be apt to say, 'No greater punishment incurred if I eliminate the victim'."
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the extermination penalty can't be used contained by cases involving adult rapes, but it have not weighed within the issue of imposing the loss penalty on those who commit child rapes. South Carolina Representative Fletcher Smith said that he believes the proposed bill won't bump into constitutional standards regarding the extermination penalty because a destruction is not involved.
There is a lot going on. If you drop by www.deathpenaltyinfo.org and do a search (left side column) for South Carolina you can find it reasonably easily.
South Carolina have had 2 exonerations and 37 executions contained by recent years. Nationally, there enjoy been 124 exonerations and 1037 executions. South Carolina is below average within the number of exonerations. The question is whether this is due to dearth of resources to look into instances of questionable verdicts.
South Carolina has have problems with the toxic injection procedure (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article. If the inmate is conscious during the last element of the procedure, as seems to be indicated) the final drug lead to an excrutiating suffocation, but because of the second drug (a paralytic) , none of the witnesses see this.
Take a look at the case of Kelly v. South Carolina on the unconstitutionaly of S. Car. sentencing procedures. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.
You will find a magnificence of information at www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
The system has seriously of problematic aspects--
Risks of executing innocent people-
124 people on extermination rows have be released with evidence of their innocence. DNA is available within less than 10% of adjectives homicides and isn’t a guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.
The annihilation penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reputable study shows the demise penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The loss penalty is neither. Homicide rates are high in states and regions that hold it than in states that don’t.
The departure penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reputable study shows the destruction penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The release penalty is neither. Homicide rates are high in states and regions that own it than in states that don’t.
We own a good alternative. Life short parole is now on paperwork in 48 states, including South Carolina. It funds what it says. It is sure and swift and from time to time appealed. Life without parole is smaller number expensive than the death cost.
Death penalty costs. The departure penalty costs much more than life span in prison, mostly because of the decriminalized process. When the death cost is a possible sentence, extra costs start mounting up before trial, verbs through the uniquely complicated trial in passing penalty cases (actually 2 separate stages, one to opt if the defendant is guilty and the second to choose the sentence, mandated by the Supreme Court), and appeals.
The annihilation penalty doesn't apply to general public with money. Its natural for the “worst of the worst,” but for defendants with the worst lawyer. When is the last time a loaded person be on death row, agree to alone executed?
The death cost doesn't necessarily help family of murder victims. Murder victim inherited members across the country argue that the drawn-out disappearance penalty process is tight for them and that life minus parole is an appropriate alternative.
Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent relations released from death row have already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
Legal question concerning adoption of sister contained by laws children. Not sure on what type of attorney we need.?
Ok, here is the situation. My sister contained by law come here to the U.S. with her two children after marry this guy. This guy basically looked-for a slave, and not a wife so she left him. She and the kids are here on conditional visas. She very soon wants to be independent, and walk work in California (We're contained by FL). She wants to quit the children with us (2 girls, 3yrold, and 11 yr old). We are fine near this, but I know we'll need some compassionate of legal guardianship of the children. Since the children are here on immigrant visa do we an immigration attorney or could another lkind of aywer do this for us?Answers: first off find a kith and kin court attorney and then he or she will narrate you if you need a immigration advocate . I hope all works out ably for you . good luck .
Family Lawyer.
Can I cross Canadian border (and back) by car beside just Driver's License and Soc Security Card?
Answers: For presently, you can. In the future you will call for a passport.
Here is an article from USA Today which explains the changes:
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007...
If you are a US citizen later the answer is YES. Unless Canada requires that you have a Passport.
If you are Canadian Citizen consequently I believe you only call for your passport.
and a squeaky clean dictation, not even a DUI..
Does it really take a being to find his succession in existence if he is independent?
Sometimes it takes a individual to succeed if he is independent but most of the time he will need guidance and advices from his parents to guide him.i feel if you're independent you can move freely without anybody to stop you on what you're doing
but it's really frozen to be independent if you can't support yourself and this only proves that you entail your parents or your guardian
Answers: Independence comes with greatly of responsibility.
Making the right decisions become much more important. Some parents backing their kids by making them get job, and learn how to feel their money.
When you get out on your own, you swot that there is a big difference between requests and needs. You might want that clean shirt or CD - but you want to pay your rent, motor payment, buy food, etc. first.
A lot of younger general public in this country are completely inept when it comes to handling finances, some enjoy been set up for flop by watching their parents bury themselves in debt for stuff they don't really have need of. Credit card companies love it. They can charge ridiculous interest rates, and bury you. Unless you can manage to keep hold of a credit card for emergencies solitary, you should avoid them completely.
Getting sucked into buying an expensive car - or even worse, leasing a saloon is another pitfall to avoid. Reliable transportation is important, but again - wishes vs. wants. You entail transportation, and though you might want the shiny new honda - you can't afford a $500 a month saloon payment, and $200+ insurance until you attain a real errand.
Education is important - short it, you only own a few options available for making fully clad money - most of them illegal.
Yes..
What is considered overtime when you are paid every two weeks?
Is it anything over 80 hours within two weeks?Answers: Leave it to a very simple quiz like this to bring out the ignorance of nation. This is common information that they should know right rotten the top of their heads.
Here is the correct answer to your sound out.
If you are an hourly employee, hours worked over 40 surrounded by a regular work week are to be paid at time and a partly. It does not matter if you work 12 hours days, Sundays, holidays, night or whatever else. Federal Labor Laws requires an employer to repay you time and a half for hours worked over 40 within a regular work week. This is regardless of how your employer pays you. Averaging two weeks is illegal and your employer could be fined contained by addition to have to pay you overtime owed.
If you are "salary" you may still be eligible for overtime. In decree to be considered salaried employee, it must be white collar work, within a position of authority, and making over $465 per week.
Some states have silly little law about what is overtime and what is not, but federal regulation TRUMPS that.
Now some of you are saying anything over 8 hours contained by a day is overtime. This may be the skin if your union have negotiated that near the company. This is an agreement with your employer above and beyond what is required of them. An employer by federal tenet, is not required to give any extra payment for hours over 8 in a sunshine, Sundays, holidays, or so forth.
What are your remedies? You have 18 months to folder a complaint with the Department of Labor. If you enjoy standing, then your employer could be fined and you are entitled to your overtime remuneration, attorney's fees, and in tons cases punitive damages.
So in short. It is NOT over 80 hours surrounded by two weeks. It is over 40 hours in a regular workweek which is defined as a continuous interval of 168 hours.
EDIT-
Back to law arts school, you hack! Where in the Blue Blazer are you getting this "48 hour" workweek?
It depends on the position. Some say anything over 8 hours is considered over time hours. Some say-so anything over 40 hours in a one week retribution period is considered over time hours. It would be established on a weekly basis even if you are rewarded biweekly.
But some jobs read aloud if you didn't meet 40 hours within the week you will not be paid overtime for the hours you worked. It's a approach to screw people out of overtime.
It depends on the employer, and the specific career. Some people's job description includes a fixed number of hours a daytime, with anything over that person considered overtime. We have non-salary staff where on earth I work and that's how it works for them. My job is a "salaried" charge - that means that I enjoy to work however many hours my employer deem necessary to procure the work done. If that is 18+ hrs a sunshine for a week, then that's what I enjoy to do. Though if that happened more than a time or two, I would probably pass out :-) .
There may be law in your city, state, country, etc. that shorten the number of hours an employer can impose. Also, if you work as a partaker of a union, they may also hold negotiated precincts as part of the contract. You will stipulation to do some research to see how things apply in the specific living.
You need to check beside the policy for the company you work for. I get salaried every two weeks, but overtime is for individual weeks-anything over 40 hours.
Also, if you are a salaried employee, it would not be overtime any way.
Legally it is anything over 40/week.
That 80/2 week extent thing is techincally forbidden, but is done frequently. OT laws require a weekly addition unless your exempted by job title or something else within the law.
It depends on who you work for and where on earth you work. Traditionally anything over 40 hrs a week is OT. So if you work 45 hours one week and 35 the next, you could own 5 hrs of ot.or not depending on your states guidelines.
The company I used to work for considered any time you worked that wasn't on the schedule OT...even if you be scheduled 20 hours. (They call it OT, but you wouldn't get OT wage unless over 40 hrs for the week). It does get a bit confusing and you stipulation to make sure that you get the message your companies terminology and definition of OT. Keeping contained by mind, that if your paid a remuneration.there is no OT.
First I AM an attorney.
Second, Wayne is correct in relation to FEDERAL law. Anything over 40 hours contained by a 7 day work week is considered overtime.
Employees covered by the overtime provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) must be compensated at least one and one-half times their regular wage rate for any hours over 40 within a work week. Note the primary difference between the substance of the state and federal overtime laws, which is that organization covered by the federal law must be compensated overtime (time and a half) for all hours over 40 within a work week, whereas employees not covered solely by the state law must be rewarded overtime only after 48 hours.
To find out what your state ruling says on the subject of the issue, go here: http://www.dol.gov/esa/contacts/state_of...
One point, if state directive differs from Federal requirements, Federal law requires the state follow the most restrictive statute within favor of the employee.
EDITED FOR BART:
Nice try but subsequent time actually read the entire statute. As I stated, not adjectives employers are covered by FLSA and thus fall below a different clause which allows for 48 hours before triggering OT pay cheque.
According to Federal Labor Law.
Anything over 40 hours in a 7 time pay spell is overtime.
Some States have their own labor law and consider anything over 10 hours a day overtime, some use 12 hours within a day and some own no laws what so ever.
Unmarried fathers rights to regular access?
Father to a 3and partly year, paying lb130.00/mth regularly. initial access day be every wednesday, changed day rotten to suit mum. mum has regularly taken daughter to stay beside new boyfriends domestic and not informing father until day of access and merely through father phoning. mum has also deliberatly not answering his call when his number appears, only when ring from a number she doesn't recognise. very distressing for both father and daughther. where on earth does he stand legally, where on earth does he start. help please!!!Answers: The mother is a freak. And her boyfriend probably have a big hand within how the mother is in this situation. The father wants to go and see a solicitor instantly.
Hire a lawyer, move about to court and ask for mediation.
Don't quit when the going gets tough!
Good Luck
If you enjoy paperwork that clearly defines your visitation rights, the mother is NOT allowed to metamorphose it around to suit her needs. You may requirement to hire an attorney, go pay for to the courts and enforce your rights to visitation.
If you DON'T have anything surrounded by writing, then I HIGHLY suggest you bring back something on paper. These situation NEVER return with better, only worse.
First bad, good for you for paying child support and person involved in your daughters existence!!
If you have visitation surrounded by writing, I would call your advocate and get on her at once. Just because she is "the mother" doesn't net her right and doesn't give her the right to hold on to you from your daughter. If I were you I would insist on more time beside your daughter as well. You should enjoy her for weekends, some holidays..as well as father's sunshine etc.
You need to own some sort of working relationship with this woman. She wishes to realize that you are going to be an involved parent and you have 15 years of parenting ahead of you. Every child deserves to enjoy, enjoy and count on parents that can communicate and will support them. No business what their personal feelings are for one another. For doesn`t matter what reason you are no longer together, you both saw something surrounded by each other at least possible for a night..so build on that and develop a plan that you adjectives can live and thrive with. Talk to the mother.accessibly without anger just about this.maybe you can work something out together instead of going to court. If she is unreasonable or uncooperative, phone the lawyer and carry nasty. Good luck & best wishes.
What are the actions taken by the command when anybody is caught guilty while cutting trees?
Answers: They chop bad your head. What administration?
More information is needed for a valid answer.
However, if you are caught cutting down trees on public property (say a national forest or park), next you could be charged with a variety of crimes---defacing public property, theft, vandalism, logging in need a licence :).
More Questions and Answers:
[1661] - [833] - [1578] - [1466] - [665] - [1586] - [933] - [1885] - [1610] - [1753] - [1050] - [1988] - [857] - [1357] - [1776] - [1859] - [51] - [1967] - [1020] - [1689]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: