Law Questions and Answers
Do police have a right to investigate a car contained by Indiana if it is impounded?
I had picked up my vehicle from the impound lot. The police told me they were inquiring my car and did so lacking my permission. I be pulled over for a traffic violation and it be impounded for expired tags.Answers: Yes they do for several reason.
Once impounded they are responsible for the car and it's contents. Meaning if they didnt run inventory and if yuo got it wager on you could claim there be something of value within it that is presently missing and without inventory of the coup¨¦ they would have no proof it wasnt nearby.
The vechicle could contain something dangerous IE explosives (not a bomb) but something i.e. explosive so from a saftey stand point it makes sense.
It could also contain wrong material such as drugs and it would not be contained by the best intrest of the police to hold a vehicle that contained drugs or give vehicle that contained drugs vertebrae to someone.
It is called an inventory hunt. Once property is seized, the police have a right to inventory it's contents. You probably necessitate to run right about presently. Becasue they usually don't do this unless they suspect you have done something, and can't obtain get a warrant to look for evidence. Also, local cops usually single do this at the behest of some greater agency like the fbi or the dea. are you a drug mule? did your wife die beneath suspicious circumstances? are you a rapist? serial killer? did you embezzle money? securities fraud? child molester? This is extraordinary treatment you are getting. They are looking for something resembling DNA, documents of a transaction, or contraband.
How can you be a adult at 18 and cannot drink by imperative but its still easy access effect you can do what you want?
Answers: Because its a dumb law that requirements to go
I'd still approaching to know why you can't drink but you can dance nude at 18. (scatches head)
What's the difference between Treason and Insurrection?
Answers: Treason is aiding an external enemy. Insurrection is raise arms against the nation i.e. revolution.
______________________________________...
18 USC § 2381. Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies period of war against them or adheres to their enemy, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer loss, or shall be imprisoned not smaller number than five years and fined under this title but not smaller amount than $ 10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office lower than the United States.
______________________________________...
18 USC § 2383. Rebellion or insurrection
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engage in any revolution or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or give aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or incarcerated not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office below the United States.
Under the influence of a drug and court cases question?
So here's my ask:A few years back Michael Jackson be taken to court because of breached contracts, and he claimed that the reason the contracts be breached was because he be under the influence of misery medications while signing the contracts and he have no recollection of signing them. However if a man on trial for murder were to claim duplicate thing, he would still be locked up and perchance even for longer because of the use of drugs during the act. Where is the strip drawn? When does the influence of drugs not come into account when a creature is in court?
Please this is not an argument roughly speaking Michael Jackson so please just answer the sound out.
Answers: I'm sure there be more to the Michael Jackson case than the 15 second or so of testimony you cite here. Stepping stern from the specific case, here is a difference between civil law and criminal decree. In civil law, a contract is considered to be made between equals. Thus, a minor or a mentally disabled party is considered by the law to be by definition unequal. Someone claiming to be unequal because of spasm medication (the doctor made me do it) might have an arguement, but it would own to be hashed out contained by court. Someone claiming they were drunk or lofty -- a self-inflicted impairment -- would probably have a greater burden to prove. In criminal imperative, the test is stricter: whether the accuse possessed a knowledge of right and wrong and the facility to act on that experience at the time of the crime. Since taking drugs (not medications) is an inherently criminal act surrounded by itself the defendent would probably have to argue first that they didn't know they be being drugged and after go on to argue that the effects of the drugs took away their talent to tell right from wrong. It would be a heck of a burden to construct that case.
I judge that Murder under the influence of drugs, is a touch different. Michael wasn't in court for that. But, dutiful point. There is not much of a difference. They both were lower than the influence. But, that is the excuse at times. I be drugged up, so I didn't realize what I did. Both excuses don't fly. Michael should pay up. And the murderer should jump to prison.
Can i sue my mom?
for invasion of privacy but thing is that she is invading my privacy on her laptop?Answers: her laptop? You hold no privacy on HER laptop.
You have no grip. She's your mother. It's her job to to hold on to tabs on you & where on earth you go. She is lawfully responsible for your actions untill you turn 18. You don't enjoy any expectation of privacy under the imperative. Particularly as you stated, it's HER latop not YOURS.
Legislator that want s socialized health meticulousness plan, what knowledge do they hold to write a fair plan?
A being that abuses drug, is homeless because he destroyed the shelters he lived within and have be banned and insists he cannot work because he hurt his rear legs, event though he can lift creamy to help a friend do work incurred $40,000. surrounded by medical bills from an over dose that cause respiratory and cardiac arrest and pneumonia. He be placed on medicaid that is covering most of his bill and the set off is being written past its sell-by date. This patient be sent to a nursing home for rehab that is full covered by Medicaid.(Medicaid is funded by federal rates money paid by income rates and land tariff amongst other taxes to the working class).
Another man worked his entire life, compensated FICA taxes and contributed to his medical plan. He retired then become ill for the first time surrounded by his life. He solitary met observation status surrounded by the hospital even though his care is more than his wife can muddle through safely. He is not eligible for Medicare assistance, for him to be placed surrounded by a nursing home, and would have to reward out of pocket if he chooses to go to a nursing home.
How is this do?
Are the legislators that voted for this current social insurance plan proud of it? Is this why they opted to afford themselves a special health perfectionism plan instead of Medicare?
Why are those who refuse to be responsible for themselves given a better plan than the empire who pay for it through taxes?
cardiac arrest and pneumonia. He be placed on medicaid that is covering most of his bill and the be a foil for is being written bad. This patient be sent to a nursing home for rehab that is full covered by Medicaid. (Medicaid is funded by federal duty money paid by income due and land excise amongst other taxes to the working cla
Another man worked his entire life, salaried FICA taxes and contributed to his medical plan. He retired then become ill for the first time contained by his life. He solely met observatio status in the hospital even though his perfectionism is more than his wife can manage soundly. He is not eligible for Medicare assistance for him to be placed in a nursing home and would hold to pay for his stay himsel
Answers: Legislators can look to other countries to look at the systems they hold.
The examples you give above are interesting. I live within the UK, all would achieve treatment, and none would have a huge medical bill. Yes, we hold waiting lists, but close to you can in the USA, we can get hold of private medical insurance, and also some employers proposal private health cover as economically.
But the most important facts, if you are interested, is that surrounded by the USA, healthcare cost YOU more than I pay below a 'socialised' health perfectionism system. Not only that, healthcare is better. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care... If you look at the information, the USA has worse time expectancy figures and infant mortality rates than almost every other western democracy.
The USA is the richest and most powerful country contained by the world. If you are proud to live in it, entry that babies born in the US are more probable to die than if they were born contained by another western democracy, because of your more expensive health keeping system. Is that right?
it is a shame in this country a bum can find medical assistance, but a productive member of society have to spend all he have to get oblige,..another example that socialized medicine does not work,..
PA Real Estate Law- my rental house was sold at sheriff public sale, I received no eviction notice?
the sheriff served me a 20 daylight EJECTMENT notice axiom that the house now be owned by the bank, I be to vacate immediately. The sheriff warn that if I did not do so, he will escort me off of the property surrounded by 20 days. Shouldn't I still be served an eviction notice and be given 30 daylight notice to move? I've be here 5 years, and I'm disabled with no other place to move. My eviction / sheriff returning to lock the doors and escort me out DEC 24, Yes Christmas Eve! Merry Christmas!Answers: You requirement to talk to a legal representative or the DA about this one since different states hold different laws.
No, your estate lord lost his house. he doesn't own it anymore, any previous contracts (like a lease) are no loner valid, so be thankful for the 20 days! You should own bought it.
Should all recreational drugs (cocaine, E, Heroin, LSD, Speed) be legalised?
Answers: No. (But I am not too sure)
There is an argument for legalistation of drugs. I agree that drug funded crime will trickle if drugs are legal, and accordingly cheaper, but it is the health issues that I am concerned next to.
Cocaine for example is linked to paranoia, strongly so. Also, within is no safe channel for trying to get nation off it, minus going through cold turkey.
I agree that heroin should be legal, and its use confined to taking it lower than medical supervision, mainly because pure heroin have few long term effects. Also, nearby are several different ways of getting people of heroin. The same argument I guess could be made near speed, E and LSD. But Cocaine, no.
Only if you wish for complete commotion and death.
Politically I am a libertarian and even I don't suppose this would be responsible behavior. Before 1934 heroin and opium were endorsed. Check history to find why that was changed.
Yes. Legalising recreational drugs would stop inhabitants criminalising themselves for a bit of fun. People will be addicts regardless of authority. Drug addicts should know how to get their fix bad a doctor, (as the term "addict" denotes illness) fairly than have to rob some poor granny of her allowance to get it. Anything family like, near will be addicts that swearing that thing, be it cocaine, heroin, cigarettes, alcohol, food. Obesity kill more people than cigarettes immediately, but fat those can still go buy a Macdonald's if they chose. Legalise adjectives drugs, make them pure, control them, due them. Get the dealers out of the picture. Stop the drug money going to funding ciminals. There are various issues to iron out, this i have almost certainly, but legalising ALL drugs, is the next efficiant step.
As it is, anyone can budge out and get giant and monged whenever they please. I'm just clich¨¦, control the substance and make it safer to do so.
I myself enjoy tried some drugs, but i am in no mode an addict. I am an intelligent individual that believes in my self and my own responsibility. I enjoy read up on all kind of drugs and see the positives and downsides of them all. Look up Bill Hicks. Look up the drugs you promoter against. If it weren't for drugs, we wouldnt have greatly of the awesome music we have from the 60's and 70's. "we adjectives live in a ashen submarine"??? i'm sure we would do if we were adjectives on LSD...
If someone drives a car whilst drunk and is caught, do we adjectives shout "ALCOHOL IS BADDDD"? No, we don't. It is the person explicitly banned from driving. It is the party that is fined. Because, it is the PERSON that should know better.
Cannabis, Shrooms, and LSD should be legalized. Possibly E. everything else self say no.
(Cigarettes should be illegal)
NO
marijuana should be though!!
yes The constitutional writings enunciate we own our body to do with it as we please as long as it doesnt hurt any one else
That to put drugs within the hands of one group of general public would create a bastil of medicine
Its slavery of the individuals by govt - . One bound in servitude as the property of a human being or household.
2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence
More death are caused
by empire not being qualified making them
inhabitants buying them not knowing what is in it
never knowing the dosage as its never like on the street
unscrupulous people adjectives them with deleterious things
unscrupulous people selling them to kids
ferocity from gangs supported by the big street prices
makes criminals out of nonviolent citizens
destroys family imprisons the foremost supporters causing women and children forced to bring state aid
costs billions in rates dolars imprisoning nonviolent citizens
Breeds corruption in surrounded by our police and govt
Has been used as a tool to evoke more rights of citizens
Benifits of legalization
drugs made surrounded by a pharmacy would be safe
the dosage would be indistinguishable all the tiime
you could monitor the amount some one be buying
you could put warnings on the sign about side affects or mixing next to other drugs
you would have to be of decriminalized age to buy them
the quality would be better and the price would be cheaper eliminate unscrupulous people on the street selling them
you could charge them increasing revenue to govt
it would eliminate the colossal profits that support gangs
next to no money to support the gangs they would disappear along next to the violence over areas they control
(if you give somebody a lift food from a mean dog he soon get weak and dies)
Police could concentrate on angry crimes where some one is victimized
Prisons would not be over crowded and be used to save violent preditors rotten the street
since when was that crap a recreational drug they are unsanctioned only MUGS pinch DRUGS .ask the parents of kids O.D on the s...t and see what they say.
Nanny cams? Yay or nay?
I'm having a concrete time being okay next to nanny cams.I understand the arguments surrounded by favour of them (parents wanting to keep hold of their eye on what's going on with their children during the light of day etc.)
BUT, it feels to me close to a violation of privacy, that in fact could/should be illegal.
Imagine putting these surrounded by offices, where on earth someone is monitoring your every move at your desk all afternoon long. What about surrounded by schools - would teacher be comfortable with person watched?
Of course, the sanctuary and care of a child is of utmost stress to a parent (as I am one) - which is why parents themselves make the best caregivers.
When you hire a nanny, you do so surrounded by trust, or you shouldn't be doing it at all.
Does anyone else get the impression this way roughly speaking nanny cams?
Answers: Baby monitors in your own home is fine..CAMERAS on public property should never be considered OK
No event how much more " secure " they enlighten you it's gonna make us
As long as it is not within a place like a bathroom where on earth there is expected privacy I enjoy no problem with them.
There are too masses kids being abused by the folks charged with their attention. The nanny could do other work if they do not wish to risk mortal on a nanny cam. If they are doing nothing wrong later they should have no problem next to the nanny cam as they should not be doing anything in the areas alllowed to be video tape that they should need privacy. Since it is unofficial to tape contained by bathrooms nothing they are doing within places where a nanny cam is should result within invading privacy.
I would have no problem beside hidden cams at my place of work as long as they be not in places similar to the bathroom or other places where privacy is expected
When you hire a nanny, you do so contained by trust.
If the person is trustworthy, the nannycam won't show anything. No problem, after.
I sure wish the darn things be around when I was molested by a caregiver, but hey...that's in recent times me.
Rights for lesbians?
if you are in a adjectives law wedding and you are a lesbian do you still get rights? What states reconize lesbians and will consent to them be married? and once married there are you reconized as a married couple within all other states?Answers: You can't be within a same-sex common statute marriage anywhere within the country. Period. You would HAVE to have a marital solemnized by a state which allows it.
Other states, unfortunately, would not enjoy to recognize such a wedding.
massachusetts and seatle washington
i live here in mass theres alot of lesbians o_o
Massachusetts and no, I don't judge they are recognized as a married couple. I not sure, but I would come up with Ca. Would too. There are a lot of gays here within Ca. Not meant to be disrespectful.
You can simply represent yourself as a married couple (common law) in a state that recognize gay marriage.
More Questions and Answers:
[1415] - [609] - [1012] - [2055] - [2267] - [2066] - [27] - [1567] - [1607] - [394] - [728] - [827] - [1425] - [1823] - [171] - [2354] - [1234] - [2268] - [998] - [1585]
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question: