Law Questions and Answers

Alchohol ruins many lives, why is it permissible here in the US?

Answers: It morsel so good

No no look at what prohibition did to the US. Crime increased and relations found ways to get it. Also the Government found out how much money they can trademark off of taxing it.
because they hold people close to yourself buying it =]

and plus the people that produce it need the money, they own you and others =[
Because the most foolish of the population don't outweigh the majority of the population.

In the best of all possible worlds, culture would drink, but no one would bring drunk. In this world, it becomes too problematical to hold on to people from drinking (look at Prohibition), so we live near a situation where tons, many society enjoy alcohol, while a few misuse alcohol.

While it may not be perfect, I look at those societies where on earth alcohol is illegal and I'm glad I'm here.

Some society will ruin their lives with otherwise innocuous substances. Heck, even a Big Mac is not a devout choice for a lot of family. But McDonald's still sells them because for most folks, it's only just a meal.
Because the massive majority can use it responsibly.

Because we tried to outlaw it once (remember Prohibition) and it did not work. Sorry...but we have already be there and done that. If you be educated within the US - perhaps you should hold paid better attention surrounded by history class.

Here's an article on why Prohibition failed.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_...

If alcohol is a drug, then why is it permitted in the U.S.?

How lots more tragic fatalities must occur due to drunk driving in the past our government puts a stop to the consumption of alcohol?
Answers: your forgetting one point. booze tax

matching reason general public will always be allowed to smoke

the elected representatives dont care something like the people they keeping about their own wallet
cuz it doesnt get u out of your mind
one and only if u overdose it
unlike marijuna etc.




may you please answer my question?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
resourcefully because it is a major money industry.
only like tobbacco.

drugs are impossible.
and not all drugs are bent.
there are lots of drugs that are trial. nicotine, caffine, cold medicine...
associates shouldn't rely on the government to engineer them responsible. Plus, weed is illegal and how several people smoke that?
America never bookish the lesson of Prohibition. Making illegal any substance the majority of your population truly requirements only turns over a lucrative income to the Black Market. Thank a Prohibitionist for Organized Crime.
because when they voted to outlaw it they be drunk
I wish it be illegal, next i couldnt turn to it everytime im bored. It ruins so many lives and should be prohibited
Well we tried banning it until that time (1920s prohibition) and that actually started more crime after when we had alcohol rightfully, with gangster like Al Capone making big money selling alcohol improperly. It's better just to hang on to it legal so the command can regulate it.
Yes it is a drug. It is legal for alike reasons that porn is legitimate. For the same rationale that they will soon make Marijuana legalized. The U.S is a shame.
The Excedrin I took right after I read your question is a drug also. Should I be criminalized?
The due revenue lost would be too great. Apologies for the cynicism...
Because our government within their infinite wisdom hasn't figure out how to tax Weed! Prohibition have been tried and that didn't work any.
they can tax any alcoholic beverage. unlike drugs similar to marijuana and cocaine they cant.
Governments should not stop everyone drinking because a small portion of it are stupid enough to drink and drive. Alcohol is not a drug. We live within a free society.

How about we start next to cigarette?
They DID outlaw it - and it was a madhouse.

The item that irritates me is that people are still driving drunk after it's lawful, which means they don't vigilance about others' lives even while they're competent to drink because of people who did thought.
Many drugs are legal. All the medicine your doctor prescribes are drugs. Alcohol is also a drug, but it is a legal drug.

Drinking and driving is already unendorsed - but if someone wants to drink and not drive afterwards that is fine - conceivably not the smartest or the healthiest thing - but trial.

We don't want a government that have complete control over what we can and can't do. They tried it with Prohibition and it didn't work - relations just made their own homemade alcohol and inhabitants died from drinking it...
Never happen... Too much a segment of human culture... And you cannot blame the consumption of alcohol for DUI fatalities. You must blame the driver. It would be better to make a saloon that didn't allow people to drive if they be impaired. Would you stop relations from drinking that don't drive impaired?

And, while your at it, 45K+ culture die in traffic accident every year, and not all those are alcohol related, so we should not allow society to drive. or make bullets for guns any more, or allow ancestors to fly.

It comes down to personal responsibility, and the US government cannot regulate that...
There are alarm labels. so I guess it's only the consumer's fault. Alcohol be banned previously in the US, but it didn't work out. There could've possibly be more fatalities in the gang made and the smugglers of alcohol in that time. America lately likes thier drinks, I guess. I guess it's a bummer that people exterminate while driving drunk too.

I agree, stop global whining!
Remember prohibition?

Drugs are legitimate in the U.S. Go to a pharmacy.

You ask a strange sound out for someone who wants to stop intercontinental whining.

How much does a criminal defense attorney and a patent attorney trademark?

I was wanting to know the average every twelve months amounts each one make.
Answers: It depends entirely upon the experience level of the attorney and where on earth that attorney works.

A legal aid attorney may label as little as $26,000-$40,000 in a small town. A senior partner surrounded by white collar crime defense at a large firm within New York can earn in excess of $1 million per year.

Same piece with rights attorneys - but the range is tighter.

What i see?

i see many ways to hold us apart, busy, not talking to respectively other.
Well i did not spend half my energy building the net for greed and separation of the piles. i'm putting kucinich in organization and not for what he believes, i'm putting him there to do what he's told to do by us. presently my question. who agrees near me? i'm sure there will be something by this post to contact me next to, use it. WalKnDude
Answers: He's as worthy a candidate as you are. He have the same unpredictability of winning.
I reckon the name lower than your picture is appropriate.. WalknDud

Is this sexual Harassment?

Ok I work in a small Insurnace bureau with merely my boss and I. He is 59 I am 32. He is married I am not but I am in a comitted long residence relationship. We do not have an outside of work relationship, we do agree about our lives, but nil intimate. Well anyway for Christmas, he got me a set of two of vibrating underware. It come with a remote that he have behind his desk, so when I open it, he turned it on! I almost died! I couldn't beliveve he gave me that...Well anyway, it bothered me so much I cannot turn in today, I a moment ago cant get myself to do it. I did filch the present, cause I feel I may need it to show my working conditions. I enjoy known he have been doing things to himself within his office if you know what I be determined, and that he is into porn at work, but up until now, he have never bothered me, Do you feel this is a legal form a sexual harassment?
Answers: You get very honourable answers. The other thing almost sexual harassment is that it is somewhat subjective. It is highly relevant how the contribution affected YOU as an individual--not if another personality would have taken it as a ploy. Under these circumstances however, it's hard to see how any one could hold viewed this as appropriate. Your facts also organize me to conclude that you said or did zilch that would cause him to believe the grant would be welcomed. You own a lot of choices--1) do nought (bad choice; his behavior will escalate); 2) return the gift and narrate him it is unwelcomed and inappropriate. If he begin treating you differently, it increases your damages; 3) file a complaint next to the Human Rights Division of your state government; 4) database an EEOC complaint with the federal system; or 5) report him to his insurance companies superiors. I defend employer in this nouns of the law. At this point, if I be defending him, I'd be trying to convince you to settle it quietly for money damages and a better work environment. I'd be suggesting to the insurance company to dispatch this man for a psycological evaluation and then demote and verbs him.
The harassment must be "sufficiently severe or pervasive 'to alter the conditions of [the victim's] employment and create an slighting working environment.'" Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897, 902 (11th Cir. 1982).

Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other choral or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual stalking when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual's employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual's work concert, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.

I presume it's singularly appropriate, and might be grounds for an action below Title VII. Report it to the EEOC at http://www.eeoc.gov and let them investigate it.
Sounds similar to a joke bequest, poorly chosen and in bleak taste. Tell him his bequest was rude, crude and improper. See where it go's from here.
good luck
Strangely ample, everybody's right. It might just be his stupid conception of a gag gift, but it make you very discomfited and it does make you incompetent to do your job. I'd report him to the proper authorities and find a unmarked job.
If it put together you feel mortified you need to consent to him know. or he well save it up or you could get another situation, anyway there are LAWS and human resources rights that you have against sexual maltreatment it would do you good to look them up or ask a attorney about. You should enjoy said thanks for the endowment but I can not accept it.
to me its awfully inappropriate contribution but not so sure its sh.
It is abosolutely sexual harrasment. Get a lawyer. You should win a settlement hand down. The guy is an idiot if it didn't occur to him that his be highly inapppropriate.
You would be on shaky ground to try to claim sexual persecution.

Sexual harassment is usually not a one-event item. It is a continual on-going thing where on earth the boss or whoever keeps doing things even after you ask him to stop.


1. Do not mention the payment to him.. If he asks whether you liked it or something resembling that, tell him the truth: that you feel uncomfortable and you really didn't appreciate it. DON'T PRETEND that you like it or else it will raise your spirits him to do something else.

2. Keep a log of any inappropriate behavior - maintain times, dates, everything. This is hugely important to prove a shape of behavior.

3. If he does anything inappropriate to you - a discouraging touch, etc- be firm, be strong, tell him that if he does it again, you will contact the authorities. AND DO IT if he does! If you influence something and don't follow through, he will claim that you were a moment ago teasing him, etc.

You see, a moment ago giving a gag gift to you - which is what it sounds approaching - just doesn't mingy sexual harassment. If he doesn't do anything else, afterwards be mature, be professional, be polite but be on guard.

If "doing things to himself surrounded by his office" means masturbation or something similar to that, then you entail to be careful. Again, a moment ago be polite, be professional - but be on guard.

Is there a chief office? A headquarters? A party who you could go to and chitchat - someone like a human resources individual?

god bless
Of course its sexual harrassment, you just requirement to ask yourself if its worth all of the trouble to progress to the legal procedures advise elsewhere in this thread. After adjectives you said its a small office.

On the other foot if you could sneak in a camera and or nouns recorder and make incriminating metaphors or sounds of what he is doing behind his desk, you will eventually hold enough on him to threaten to convey and show everything to his WIFE, and then you can receive him roll a peanut across the floor with his snout.
Lighten up.

It was a Christmas gag offering.

Wonder why the cost of living is so high ? Check out adjectives the stupid law suits that relations are filing.

Guess who pays the bill. You & I every time we buy something.
First, this is probably sexual bullying.
Second, I don't believe Title VII covers businesses with smaller amount than 15 employees.
Third, your state probably have a parallel statute to Title VII which does cover small businesses.
Fourth, talk to a attorney.

Are there any law stating any regulations in keeping and practising beside throwing knives surrounded by the UK?

I've tried looking for any, but i can't seem to find anything exact, relating to UK.

Thank you for any sustain you might be able to extend.
Answers: I'm sure there are if you hit someone near a stray knife! Be out of danger
UK is a weird and silly place so check the law carefully or the special forces police squad will get you.

The Cost of the Death Penalty?

I've been told by several relatives that the death cost cost more than life within prison.

Can someone please explain why it costs more money to kill someone than it does hang on to them alive?
Answers: A lot of people ask this. The most important reason it costs so much more for the disappearance penalty than for time in prison is the endorsed process, which is supposed to keep us from executing innocent citizens. The difference in cost between the two punishments vary from state to state, and it is staggering. (sources below)

The best explanation I have see for this is at www.deathpenaltyfocus.org
Click on facts and then on costs.

Some of the safeguard that make the cost of a trial where on earth the death cost is possible is much higher
*It is much more complicated to choose "passing qualified" jurors and takes much longer.
*Defendants must hold a dual trial--one to establish guilt or innocence and if guilty a second trial to determine whether or not they would get the destruction penalty.
*Defendents who are sentenced to passing are given at least one automatic appeal to the state's extreme court
*Prosecutors and defense attorneys file oodles more pre trial motions and they all hold to be answered
*The legal team on both sides use more lawyers and more witnesses.

Keep contained by mind that the cost of annual cost of incarcerating someone varies from state to state. One example- New York State, the cost is give or take a few $35,000, per inmate, per year. In New York, over $200,000,000 was spent on a disappearance penalty system that saw 7 men sentenced to annihilation, over 12 years. Assuming they live for an average of 40 years, their incarceration would total 14 million.

The appeals process also takes a long time. Of the 126 family on death row who be exonerated, over 50 had already served more than a decade. If the process be speeded up we would be sure to execute innocent people.
unlimited appeals - you hold to convict them every six months for twenty years.
I think they should be restricted to two appeals, with no appeals for technicalities - single hard evidence.
I don't believe the State should own the power of life and departure. These are the same society who brought us the IRS and the Postal Service.

The cost argument has to do near the amount of taxpayer dollers that get spent contained by trials fighting the guilty ruling that put the prisoner on death row.
Yeah I hear this adjectives the time. It's not true though. Obviously if you kill the human being then the cost is done and over right at hand. The argument that people craft is the cost attorneys, judges, the court system for appeal after appeal.
The problem next to that argument is that you can argue that the attorneys, judges and court system are going to be rewarded no matter if it is a guy contained by court for the death cost, or for robbing a bank.

It's similar to saying it's cheaper not to arrest inhabitants for DUI because you have to foot officer yadda yadda yadda. The truth is that the officer is going to be on duty getting paid no situation what he is doing.
This is the basic concept, at hand are other factors that can exchange things. But you can manipulate numbers or statistics to support an argument.

Self defense laws?

so this guy have made it clear he intends to fight me. contained by a straight fist fight he probably would win, he be like some star highschool wrestler and im not much of a soldier. the police wont do anything because they said i dont have any proof. so if i be to use some kind of shank or weapon it would be self guard if he throws the first punch right?
Answers: No, it is NOT premeditated and the cute blonde above me suggested (sorry hunny).

By law, you own the right to defend yourself if you believe that you will sustain serious boldily injury. Now, you must get the drift that most jurisdictions enjoy laws in the region of carrying concealled weapons. Yes, contained by most places, a shank is a concealled weapon.

Before I suggest anything though, I will warn you that anytime you are confronted by an assailant, you enjoy the obligation to flee earlier taking any action against the possible attacker IF and ONLY IF in attendance is a reasonable route of escape. If he have already accosted you, you may shelter yourself; if you are in your own home, you do not own to flee; and if you feel that even trying to ecsape, you will recieve serious bodily injury, you can nick action.

My first suggestion is to help yourself to the state-approved course (about $40), buy an easily conceallable handgun, and apply for a Concealled Handgun contract. I know this advice will acquire me lots of thumbs down from dumb liberals, but if you are 21 years old, are not a felon, and do not own any domestic battery charges against you, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO CARRY A CONCEALLED WEAPON, provided that you get together your state's criteria (unless you are in Illinois or Wisconsin).

Most ancestors (not all) who are able and who come together the criteria should carry a concealled handgun. That is your right. There is truth to the wise saying, "An armed society, is a polite society." It is also true that 20% of Violent cirme in the U.S. occur in four cities: New York, Chicago, Washington D.C., & Detroit. All of these place PROHIBIT carrying handgun. So the criminals, who do not respect the law, know that they are wolves among unarmed sheople.
self-defense (depending your state of residence), can solely be used if there is an prominent threat of death, and no ability of escape! Like the dude catches you surrounded by a parking lot, you can run, but if an armed man breaks into your home, there's no where else to run, next kill him!!!

How can I find out the REAL reason my son's daycare be suddenly shut down?

My son's daycare suddenly shut down on Friday. The owner said it's lease was terminated by the proprietor, which doesn't make much sense to me as to why they would be shut down for dutiful. I have since found my son another daycare, but would still close to to know why the other one got shut down. Who would I call upon to find out?
Answers: You can call the condition department and see if they had any violation. Or any other licensing bureaus which cover daycare within your area.
Hmm. You could check near the landlord. If you reckon something shady might be going on, you can also check with the department of strength and human services in your nouns (you didn't say what state you be in), or look in your local sickly pages for the county or city department that is over daycare centers.

When will the last 69 nation abolish the death cost?

128 countries have abolish it completely or in practice (for adjectives but wartime crimes)

69 countries still do it.

When will they stop? Can they handle the pressure of over 60% of the world's nation showing them they are wrong?

source: amnesty international
Answers: Soon, I hope. There is a renewed dialogue about this surrounded by the USA. As we find out more about the means of access the system actually functions, Americans’ view have be evolving. Life without parole is very soon viewed as a sensible alternative by more and more of us. Here are some of the facts that are reshaping the dialogue.

126 citizens on death rows hold been released next to proof that they were wrongfully convicted. 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 release penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The extermination penalty is neither. Homicide rates are sophisticated in states and regions that hold it than in those that don’t.

We own a good alternative. Life minus parole is now on paperwork in 48 states. It funds what it says. It is sure and swift and once in a while appealed. Life without parole is smaller quantity expensive than the death cost.

The death cost costs much more than life surrounded by prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent culture.

The death cost isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyer. It doesn't apply to people near money. When is the last time a well-off person be on death row, permit alone executed?

The death cost doesn't necessarily help family of murder victims. Murder victim household members across the country argue that the drawn-out passing penalty process is itchy for them and that life short parole is an appropriate alternative.

Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent family released from death row have already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.
I'm from India. Here exists the means punishment and I think never. Because the Indian ethnic group (We) support this punishment against people approaching rapists, serial killers, etc.

I infer never.

Moninder Singh Pandher and Surender Koli (Indian serial killer) Don't they deserve death??

Greetings from India.
Who say we're wrong? Won't be the first time the majority of nations be incorrect; won't be the last.

When some scumbag rapes and murders your child, I'll willingly pull the switch for you if to be exact what it takes; and i'll sleep that evening.
The passing penalty will be around within these countries until crime is no longer an issue. BTW, i assume that the majority of these nations that support the destruction penalty do so out of religious conviction. So well brought-up luck changing their minds.

Actually I wasn't conversation about Christian USA or Communist China. I be talking just about Muslim countries when i referred to religious conviction.
well i am a Brit and for once i agree next to the yanks, we surrounded by the UK should have the destruction penalty grasp rid of the scum contained by the prisons that cost millions every year,so the can sit in their cell with their PlayStation's, in that is not many populace who would not want a rapist or a murderer who had done something to their relatives given the death cost

More Questions and Answers:
[978] - [2573] - [2060] - [1456] - [2288] - [420] - [1798] - [1794] - [149] - [75] - [441] - [620] - [536] - [1085] - [1248] - [955] - [1431] - [1281] - [777] - [1677]

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

Answer question: