Law Questions and Answers
Should the UK deport or imprison foreign criminals?
Prisons are at full dimensions and we are spending millions building new prisons...We are told that at hand are over 10,000 foreign nationals surrounded by our prisons about 13% of the total prison populaton...should we be wasting toll payers money keeping them here or should we deport them.Answers: If you simply deport them, they may be back subsequent week. By imprisoning them for 6mos. or a year, they may not be so inclined to return. I'm not British though, so feel free to rebuke my opinion as it's not scientifically poven.
deport
why overcrowd even more prisons when these relatives can just be sent subsidise to where they come from???
A plane ticket will cost us tax payers much smaller amount
we should just catapult them backbone across the channel!
"LOOSE!!!"
Employ them to build investigational Prisons then allow them to decay in them earlier deporting them.
If they come here and don't abide by the laws of this country, they hold no right to remain and no right to freedom.
Foreign nationals who cannot abide by the law of our nation should be tried and sentenced then deported to their respective country to serve that sentence.
If these ancestors cannot appreciate the life-style that can be attained here for themselves and any benefits that family within their native country also gain from them person here, they have no place contained by our country.
It would be nice to say 'Never to return' but beside our existing border controls (HaHa) I doubt that to be possible.
Terrorists are different anyway. Don't they already go to Guantanamo Bay?
Deport,beside no appeal or chance of ever coming final into the country !
Malpractice or Deceptive Trade Practice Violation?
I was mandate by my employer to undergo a Fitness For Duty Evaluation. Employer utilized "deceit & intimidation" to ensure attendance. The Dr. also used "deception", and refused to furnish me a copy of the Evaluation. Stating that "no Dr. / Patient relationship" existed, so he was not required to provide one.I be deceived by the employer into believing that I be attending this "Evaluation" as part of my recent FECA/FMLA claims for a physical injury at work. The Dr. also claimed that I would hold to request my "copy" from the Department of Labor.
This "Occupational Medicine Doctor" proceeded to perform what can singular be described as a "Psychiatric Evaluation". Once I finally obtained a copy of this Doctors' Evaluation, I discovered that the Dr. stated surrounded by his Evaluation that "he was not qualified to act the requested Evaluation!"
My employers' actions and the Doctors, enjoy caused growing stress, cause weight loss, down loss, loss of sleep, now I wear kevlar to work.
Answers: I would cheer you to talk to a advocate and give him or her adjectives the details of your case. No one here would be qualified to bring up to date you if there be any kind of court violation minus knowing all the details, as resourcefully as where you live as local law do vary. Most lawyer will not charge for an initial consulation fee, and this also sounds resembling it may be a contingency case, which mode that the lawyer get paid just if you get a settlement. (This make it tougher to find a lawyer sometimes, but also tell you if you have a strong luggage.) Make sure you keep anything you do have within writing from your employer or anyone, such as that evaluation.
Good luck.
Talk to your HR department.
Workers Comp is not my thing - but if your file a claim for a work injury then lower than the WC, I believe your employer does have the right to hold you checked out by the dr of their choice.
Identify 3 common conflicts (other consequently forms of discrimination) that emerge in a workplace settings?
Answers: do your own homework!
1. Being within a salary position that forces you to work over 50 hrs a week.
2. Work nouns conflict between employees who fit tightly to standard work ethics and the slackers who do everything possible not to work and still grasp paid.
3. Abusive employer thru rage, alcohol, drug verbal abuse or bad administration skills and the fear of losing your available job by fighting hindmost.
How can a plane 140 ft x 160 ft hit the pentagon at 500 mph and leave a 70 ft hole beside no wreckage?
I have be waiting for the answer to this one for a long time. Be nice to figure out why it didn't head off a big streak in the meadow as well.Answers: -----Explanation of Wreakage------
1.There are numerous photographs of immense pieces of the plane, many of these be published in the the Fourth Estate. Here’s a nice picture:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technolo...
Anyone can see that the larger pieces are of a plane. Couple this with the eyewitness accounts below & it's irrefutable that it be a plane. (As opposed to the premise that it just disappeared somewhere)
2. Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer be the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and help coordinate the emergency response. "It was without doubt a plane, and I'll tell you why," say Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the obverse of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held within my hand the tail unit of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is back up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniform from crew members within my hands, including body parts. Okay?" (from Pop Mechanics Website)
-----Explanation of Hole size------
“The Pentagon Building Performance Report” say that the hole in the Pentagon be somewhat smaller than the diameter of the plane (Pop Mech book pp 66+). This is explained by Professor Mere Sozen, a “Kettelhut Distinguished Professor Civil Engineering” at Perdue University (PM p 69). Sozen says that it’s the life of the plane, not its size that determines the size of the hole. The plane is not a cartoon qualities that punches out its outline. Moving at 531 MPH it more fluid than solid and this explains why you get the hole you get.
---------Eye-witness accounts--------
Dozens, if not hundreds, of general public stuck on I-395 saw the low-flying plane & this is well-documented in the Fourth Estate. The following is a direct quote from Wikipedia. The footnotes give you the source surrounded by media.
"The Pentagon is surrounded by Interstate 395 and Washington Boulevard, on the side where on earth the impact occurred. Steve Riskus witnessed the plane crash into the Pentagon, as he be driving along Washington Boulevard and stopped to take photographs moments after the impact.[21] Mary Lyman, who be on I-395, saw the airplane pass over at a "steep angle toward the ground and going fast" and afterwards saw the cloud of smoke from the Pentagon.[22] Jim Sutherland, also on I-395, witnessed the plane pass 50 foot overhead, heading in a straight strip into the Pentagon.[23] Mary Ann Owens, of Gannett News Service, was stuck contained by traffic near the Pentagon when she saw the airplane surpass 50 to 75 feet overhead and crash into the Pentagon.[24] Another witness, Daryl Donley, saw the crash as he be driving on Washington Boulevard. Among debris that be scattered as the plane crashed, he found a "scalded green oxygen tank obvious 'Cabin air. Airline use'" doing a tour.[24] Mr. Donley also had a camera next to him, and took some of the first photographs after the crash.[25] USA Today reporter Mike Walter, while driving on Washington Boulevard, also witnessed the crash.[26] He recounted to CNN, "...looked out my pane. I saw this plane, the jet, American Airlines shot coming. And I thought, this doesn't add up. It's really low. And I saw it. It a short time ago went — I be determined, it was approaching a cruise missile with wing, it went right here and slammed right into the Pentagon. Huge explosion."[13]
((This is about partially of the eyewitness list. They adjectives say they saw the plane))
I hope this help.
I'd like to know why so frequent American Citizens are not asking the same sound out?
Personally I'd like to Ask Bush's Cousin some question who happened to be over warranty of the trade towers during 9/11.
Star!
I wish more would press dicktator Bush.
Even better...How can they have identified adjectives the bodies (but one)
when there be hardly satisfactory parts. plus the guys removing parts were within suits and ties. At the PA site everyone was suited contained by chem suits.
On the second link in attendance is a animated gif of what I feel should hold been see from the guard shack camera.
Peace
http://www.stj911.org/
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentagon/s...
Hmm.
Now, how many individuals would have to know roughly something like that ahead of time?
You'd own the people feeling like to die by flying the other three "diversionary" planes. You'd have to own all the nation on the ground doing the cleanup. You'd have to own all the race who made the decision to create this happen. You'd own to have the military personnel who fired the "missile", not to mention adjectives the people who. saw the "missile" pocket off and hit the Pentagon. You'd enjoy to explain how the people who departed on a plane (including a famous report personality suddenly disappeared in need anyone know where or why.
Yep, sure sounds approaching a conspiracy to me. Easy to pull bad and easy to keep hold of under wraps for the six years since.
Now that they know I am on to them, I'm gonna sit here lower than my aluminum helmet and watch out for the black helicopters.
the plane is similar to a BIG soda can- long and fairly thin.
how small can you crush a can, and next cook it in 8000 gallons of spout fuel ?
Is it Rape if you have sex near your girlfriend while she is asleep?
I'm not trying to promote rape but someone told me the other day that sex is considered rape if the other personality does not consent. I understand spousal rape can go down if one partner forces the other person to hold sex. My question regard someone you are already involved in regular sex near.What if they are passed out. I would have have sex with her if she be awake but now whe's passed out. Is it rape?Answers: yes it is considered rape. even if you hold had sex past when they were OK beside it. yes it would be rape to have sex beside someone while unconscious.
If you enjoy sex with your girlfriend and she sleeps through it, You necessitate more practice!!!
If she wakes up and say "Knock it off and travel to sleep", I guess that's rape. Not consensual between both parties.
If she's to squandered to know the difference, why bother? Sounds like it should be contained by the same catagory as cadaver foul language!!
I guess some of the answers you got surrounded by here are all stem from JOKES and funny circumstances. Nobody is so serious to answer any question here in the forum. As if everything is funny and a scream. For me every question is personal in itself and I disregard very funny comments or opinion especially when it comes to sexual content.
My judgment on your question is NO it is not rape even if your girlfriend is asleep. She have no consent that is true, but since you already told us surrounded by your story that both of you had have regular sexual intercourse in yesteryear, so I donot see any criminal intent in this comportment even if your gf is sleeping at the time you engage her to own sex with you. Because the burden would lounge in the girl to put on trial you of rape, if I would be the judge surrounded by this case, my cross-examine would definitely search the motive of the girl in accusing the boyfriend of rape, what is the motive of the charges? What is the starting place of the charges? If the girl would tell me "i am sleeping and i donot similar to to have sex at that time" that's it? You enjoy drag me in this hour and surrounded by this place my lady merely to tell me this? There are more pertinent cases of murder and homicide that I enjoy to review yet I am here listen to this none sense?
One thing is clear if the girl have nothing to do beside you whatsoever, and she passed out and you had sex near her that is clearly a RAPE charges. If she is your girl any PASSED OUT OR NOT PASSED OUT and you simply engage surrounded by sexual act afterwards it is not rape for goodness sake.
Girlfriend vandalizes your sports car or crashes it on purpose. What would you do?
One friend of mine get into a fight beside his wife. She poured sugar into the gas tank of his vehicle and to make sure the position got done right she drove it around the block until the engine blew.Another friend of mine be looking at porno pictures and talking to girls on myspace. His girlfriend grab his brand new $1,500 laptop. Said she HATES computers and slammed it onto the floor. Ofcourse breaking it within half.
He's a calorific weight boxer and doesn't hit women so he go out to her car and starts smashing her saloon with a baseball bat.
Another girl I know crashed her boyfriends BMW that he (let her use) premeditated and totaled it!
This seems to be popular passageway for women to get revenge.
I've never hear of a woman that got into trouble after pulling something resembling this off!
Has anyone ever hear of a woman that got sued for this? What happen?
Answers: I've never heard of a woman man punished and that's because men don't usually sue them for such behavior and they should. No one, man or woman has the right to verbs one's property which is one of the fundamental human rights. I am a woman but I still hate such bitchy stuff!SUE, SUE, SUE!
File a police report is what I would do if I be your friend.
No idea.
If I be a guy who cheated on his girlfriend and all she did to me be smash up my car or computer I would newly be happy she picked an inanimate purpose instead of doing an amputation on me (remember Lorena Bobbitt?).
For gosh sakes. Why not just provide the ring back?
Not intuitively, but suing them is going to be their best bet.
Can a blind person justifiably give signature lacking any authentication by sited person ?
A blind individual can't read the document on which he gives signature and anybody misuse his disability to read, what are the preventive measures for this contained by law ?Answers: the blind folks that i have deal with will NOT sign a document unless it is read to them by a creature that they trust (often a city has a blind services department which will have reader who will come and read documents to them) -
for legal documents (like wills, power of attorney, etc), if you want an extra cloak of protection - give the blind personage the documents about a week contained by advance, read the documents to the human being (word for word) - allow them time to have the documents read to them - and afterwards re-read the documents to them at the signing (in case near are changes, etc)
i cannot judge of preventative measures rather than the usual contract defenses of "i did not know what it said" or "that is to say not how the contract was buried when signed" which i believe that the courts would give extra leniance to the blind entity.
Great Question! Most of it comes down to Contract Law which has relatively little to do beside the Signature itself. There are protections in contract statute, but they apply to all family not just blind relations. If a blind person (or you) signed a contract to pay envelope a contractor $2,000 to build a fence, and he built the obstruction the blind person could not run back after that and say "I couldn't read the contract" If he discovered latter however that he was certainly charged $20,000 for the fence, and not $2,000 consequently he would have a luggage because the contract wouldn't hold water. ($20,000 for a obstruction is unreasonable so it makes the contract void) OR if he found out then that the contractor never built the fence (figured the blid personality couldn't see it anyway) He would have a grip because he didn't receive the fence, and remunerated the money but so would you.
Another thing that might put together a contract void is if a court finds that the signer be not of sound mind when the contract be signed into. Example being -- Grandma is contained by a nursing home drooling on her self, and signs a contract to buy a new boat from the boat salesman that stopped by the nursing home. The court would eventually rule that Grandma didn't know what she be doing, and thus make the contract cancelled. Grandma gets her money pay for, and boat guy has to run to another nursing home.
Outside of basic contract regulation, I don't believe the blind have any extra protections. They should other give a Power of Attorney to a loved one though for meaningful contracts that will need to be signed.
Did I do the right thing?
Today I be in NYC, I rob summer classes at an art school contained by New York, and I saw a man following an old asian woman and her little asian dignified daughter I think it be. He followed them for 4 blocks before making his move, I lone saw all of this because they be all infront of me walking down E22nd street at the time I be walking down it. Anyways, the man kept getting closer and closer to them until finally he hit the woman with a crowbar and grab the girl. I immediately run up to him as fast as I could and whistle for a cab and when it come near the license plate said fresh and it have dice in the mirror. If anything I can speak that this cab be rare, but I thought "nah, forget it, yo holmes to Bel-Air!" I pulled up to the house around 7 or 8 and I yell to the cabbie "yo holmes, smell ya later!" I looked at my territory, I was finally in that, to settle my throne as the prince of Bel-Air.Answers: I have to agree, this is some delicious copypasta. All frozen rain the Fresh Prince! Seriously though, hilarious.
Hell to the yea.
Fresh Prince
You did the right item. I just give you a star.
sh*thole
Can gun owners demand God embezzle them to Heaven when they kill someone, because the U.S. Constition guarantees a
right for a U.S. citizen to own and use a gun?If God won't whip you, remind him that he has be overruled by the Constitution of the United States. Even God can't fight the Constitution.
The United States Rules. God Follows. (As it have been ever since the U.S. found it could use religion to claim whatever it wishes to do).
You have even hear Bush doing it on television.
Answers: I believe its funny how some of the Christan people today chew over they can change GODs word s to support their view- thou shall not muddier instead of thou shall not shoot, like GOD is going to want if it was fit or not, give me a break. JESUS made it relatively clear in sermon on the mount, that glory is only for the heavenly minded, the charitable and giving. Unfortunatly today poeple have lost thier religious conviction to fear and are not extraordinarily christain anymore.
Once again, the commandment is most correctly translated as, “Thou shalt not murder”. Furthermore, according to Christian theology Jesus was the best sacrifice for sin therefore, if you believe within Him you have offered that sacrifice and your sins are resolved.
This does not intimate that you can run around killing citizens and sinning and claim that you accept Jesus because if you do, you strive to live surrounded by accordance with His teachings. However, that’s ultimately up to God to deem.
Your question is a rant within disguise, but I'll answer it any way. Sure they can cause the demands. However, as most adults know, making a demand and have that demand met are two different things.
Satirical rant when they are fully baked happen to be among my favorite desserts: High fiber, low cholesterol, and no tooth rust. Your rant, however, is half-baked, and not nearly sweet enough.
Every handgun owner is a executioner? Or are you saying lately because I own a handgun I shouldn't be allowed into Heaven?
By the way you manufacture no sense - You say that the US rules, God follows, but theUS uses religion to defend what it wants..afterwards you are saying religion rules, and the constitution is lower.
They really need to stop burning incense surrounded by churches -- the fumes are getting to people.
They may constraint it, but it will not happen. Rev.7:4
I guess you are the big-hearted of person that one and only believes in what he can with the sole purpose see and feel.
You're right. Most gun owners never exterminate anyone, but when they do God is on their side! It's a way of reducing the amount of evil contained by the world, so every gun owner should be aware of this inalienable right.
"I'd rather hold a gun and not need one, than obligation a gun and not have one."
Leagal Question-Please ONLY answer if you know what you're talking roughly?
In the state of Idaho, is it legal for a citizen to own an AK-47?Answers: No.
Private ownership of fully automatic AK rifles is tightly regulated by the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. The Gun Control Act of 1968 cease importing of foreign-manufactured fully automatic firearms for civilian sale and possession, effectively halting further importation of civilian accessible AK rifles.
In 1986, an amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act stopped all adjectives domestic sales of fully automatic weaponry for civilian use (non-military/non-LEO). Fully automatic weapons are still manufactured surrounded by the US for military and law enforcement use. However, automatic firearms manufactured domestically prior to 1986 or import prior to 1968 may be transferred between civilians in accordance near federal and state law. Several Soviet and Communist Chinese rifles made it into the U.S. during the mid-1960s, when returning Vietnam veterans brought them home after invasion from enemy troops. Many of these be properly registered during the 1968 NFA amnesty.
Go to the source man. Anyone can pretend to be a lawyer on the internet..
This should bring you off to a honourable start.
http://www.state.self.us/
you ask a very fitting question ! ! !
I sit here trying to numeral out a way f aphorism this , without seeming close to a gun toating freak!
in its simplest form , the answer could very well be yes..providing you dont get caught have it!
like adjectives laws its allowed to do what you want till you get caught !
this quiz is like asking is it official to speed where and when ever you want? the answer to this is still yes , till you win caught , but the right answer is "NO"!! See most peopl e think they hold to get somewhere as hurried as the car will stir, till they wreck or get caught.
The law for owning guns are brought about by a few to own the rest of us! The course learned from WW2 are presently gone and have be for a long time!
You can buy a legal weapon contained by this country and make it an automatic (or enjoy it done for you ) . this is still a legal weapon! till its fired! next and only after is not legal anymore!
our law now are so perverted , that only someone near the know how can warp a law into anything they want and bring away with it!
for instance , if i or you shot someone contained by the face we would be put surrounded by jail for a long time , but then again it has be done by someone in our own organization and that person is still free as if it never happen! Where are the laws near? does that mean that some law are only suitable for a few and the rest can just travel to H**L?
Perception is the key as to the answer you are inquiring for , you did not say that you (or someone you know) be picked up and arrested for owning such a weapon, and you did not say how it be discovered either .you did not voice how it was or when or where on earth it was purchased??
so surrounded by answer to your question , for the simple every sunshine person that doesnt stand a unsystematic in a court room . the answer is 'NO" ! !
More Questions and Answers:
[316] - [675] - [1879] - [583] - [2309] - [2316] - [764] - [2035] - [617] - [2448] - [1208] - [1917] - [415] - [1824] - [621] - [2490] - [1599] - [64] - [400] - [507]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: