Law Questions and Answers

Why is there so much red cartridge when people are surrounded by need of assistance?

Why does it own to take so much time and resouces freshly to help one soul. For that one person they enjoy over five to six social workers making over fourty thousand a year. And most people that obligation assitant have id's hey can check to see if a human being is employed or not, so why make it so difficult. With gas prices so giant how can people know how to support themselves. They collect enough contained by taxes in our state alone to nurture, house, and clothe the entire state. So why make it so knotty on people to achieve assitance when they are in unadulterated need of it when the resources are nearby to help them?
Answers: Hi Vivi,

First, the make-up of bureaucracy is such that all of them are slow and overgrown. It is basically the way it is, as desperate as that is.

Another idea is probably because there are folks out in attendance who take dominance of the system and so it ends up taking time to check people out and see if they are truly within need.

I have to get food stamps one time and we used them for 3 months. I didn't discern bad we'd put lots of charge money into the system, BUT as I went through the process it took time and be pretty humiliating. The processors looked at me with suspicion and when it come down to it we got more or less 125.00 a month for the 3 of us (1985) which was strong to get by on. I finally couched why some people cheat the system, NOT THAT I CONDONE ANY CHEATING. My mom could clear my electric bill, but if she gave me money to pay packet that bill I had to report it and lose my food stamps. It be a weird and mortified experience. I was relieved when we could stop. It be back when food stamps be paper vouchers. I would budge to check out and a cashier would holler to the boss. Hey, Bob, I got food stamps here, could you relieve me!!!! People would look around at me and I felt "poor" and approaching I had a scarlet F on me for food stamp user!

Bottom Line: There are hundreds of millions of population in America. There is no simple/swift road to assist those in necessitate. It just isn't going to crop up unless "big brother" steps in and runs everything and YOU KNOW I DON'T WANT THAT!!!

expurgate: The most encouraging thing that happen during that time was a friend of mine from a Bible study I go to came over in the future, took me to a Sam's Warehouse and said, "Buy whatever you want, up to 150.00 dollars. I merely can't even say how blessed and help that made me feel. Just when things seize so bad God sends someone along to move up my heart up and help me turn on. Wherever this wonderful woman is tonight, I hope God will bless her again for me. He has to discharge all my debts of love, I usually can't ever repay the holiness others do for me. But then sometimes God help me do something for someone that they can't repay.
1. It's run by the government. Keep that contained by mind if you vote.
2. If it were too trouble-free everyone would attempt to get it.
3. Because too frequent people have a feeling they are entitled to free handouts from the government and the system is choked full of freeloaders.
4. A lot of general public that could go out and earn a living would fairly stay home and sit on their *** and have someone else nick care of them..

I hope this help.
Because for every one person that truly requirements assistance, there are 15 others that purely want to take pre-eminence of the system for a free ride.

Long time back this incident happen i would like to share my expierences?

surrounded by life which i face it has get to do with woman harrassment . i be travelling in bus within double decker in the suburbs of city mumbai path back surrounded by 1986 it so happened iwas sitting implicit the window form there be a simple looking decently dress girl sitting within front of me . she was also sitting alone divergent my seat . i didnot safekeeping to look at her second times. after sometime
bus stopped at the stop .alighted one middleaged man little heavy set he be he came and sit beside that girl sitting opposite me . after sometime i could quality that girl was sensation little uncomfortable and she told that man sitting beside her to sit properly . he basically smiled tilted himself sideways and farted facing this girl felt embarssed and looked at me and said to that you are shameless fellow to that soul who did all this stroke. i was watching adjectives this drama . this girl comes and sits besides me . i say nil . meanwhile that fellows get up to get down and tell me she deserves it . i felt sorry comment
Answers: these things r average kumar ,it always happen in buses and the incident which u r relating is not a big piece because some men do more horrible things in bus.within crowded buses men get a fate to come near ladies so they filch advantage of that.by the course u r thinking abt 20 years ago thing zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.wake up up
I don't think near is anything to feel sorry within that, in reality you should feel ashamed of yourself. If the man be teasing a female in front of you, even if you cannot protect her at least possible you should have get up from your seat and given your form to her. You did not do that. Now when you are writing all this, I do not know what is your intention? Are you trying to blame that man that why did he do that? If so, consequently I am sorry my friend you are the biggest mistaken person because it be your fault too. But if you are committing your mistake and apologising surrounded by this forum yes I appreciate that and expect you and many similar to you including me would learn a lesson from this incidence and protect females from enticing.

How much resposibility should the President have contained by an emergency?

Is it better to let the agencies that accord with it to automatically respond or do you deduce the paperwork is more important? I deem agencies should already have plans contained by place so if there is an emergency they can automatically respond to it fairly than have to hang around for the proper funding. Having presidental approval of national emergency is moronic and wastes time and resources. Just tolerate them deal beside it. What are your thoughts?
Answers: Well during the Katrina debacle the President have the option of federalizing the state governing body resources of Louisiana.

I would suggest that the state government's response before, during and after the storm be totally incompetent. Mayor Nagin was incredibly re-elected after his fumbling, though the Governor fixed not to run again. In fact the levees own been repaired but not superior because the state wants the Federal Government to foot for it.

Could the Feds done any better? Maybe not. But the whole disaster could own been alleviated near a proper and timely response before the storm even hit, clearly a state responsibility.

I don't regard as the citizens are entirely blameless in this fiasco any. But then sheep don't become lions overnight.

Check out the 2nd source below in the order of Federal confusion and the first source about limiting the power of the Federal policy in these type of cases. They are both biased, but this disaster have polarized everyone.
NONE!!!!

Most emergencies are at the STATE rank, therefore the STATE should matter with them.

Most folks want the Feds involved in EVERYTHING nonetheless wonder why government spending is within the trillions!

FEMA should NOT exist, emergencies close to flooding and storms etc are STATE issues, NOT Federal issues.
If the President doesn't authorize and approve what is an emergency and what is not, then how will that amass resources? They would be responding to instances that a state or local government can knob.

Remember, the state has to ask for lend a hand from the federal government within emergencies. When be the last time you hear of that the President declined oblige?

When you quit a job is it compulsory for you to hand surrounded by a resignation? Why? And if you don't will it look bad

for you? Why would a company hound you to turn contained by a resignation?
Answers: Like the others said, it is not required or necessary, but it is the right article to do. It allows both you and your employer to break things off on a civil smooth. It gives you employer a unpredictability to find a replacement (either internal or external) and it allows you time to make the transition to your untried job. If you departed without catch sight of your new employer will ask for reference and you will not get a fitting review.
Uh..they want a formal notice of why and when you are disappearing so that seperating you is according ot policy and legal?

Keep surrounded by mind; you may need this employer as a insinuation; or they may be pointed in letting anyone who checks on you know roughly the resignation problems.

DOn't burn bridges; resign in writing to a checker.
Are they going to give you a 2 week make out if they decide to consent to you go? Fair is Fair!

I would hail as OSHA if they are threatning to hold your check,doesn't sound legally recognized.

What is the best way to bar an national emergency?

I think the Coast Gaurd have the right idea to perform first and deal near the details later. What are your thoughts on this?
Answers: The U.S.A have too many agencies that are supposed to contract with guaranteed emergencies.For example: Federal Bureau of Investigation,and Central Intelligence Agency,and Federal Emergency Management Agency,and Center for Disease Control,and Homeland Security,and Coast Guard,and Navy,and Airforce,and Army,and National Guard,and Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms,and Drug Enforcement Agency,and U.S. Postal Inspection Service,plus hundreds of Local Law enforcement agencies,and special investigations unit,etc.etc.The very thought of this frequent agencies trying to deal near a national emergency boggles the mind!
How could this many different agencies or Departments
possibly work together within such a manner than they could adjectives coordinate what is to be done during a national emergency?
The right hand would not know what the departed hand is doing!
And that is to say the problem with these agencies,they are fragmented,and segregate in the sense that they can't or don't want to work together contained by such instances. They all move about off contained by their own direction looking for their own answers which they never share with respectively other.Which will most certainly front to mass confusion in a national emergency,as it have in yesteryear.It is only years after the reality when they decide to share their information that it is discovered that they held the pieces of the puzzle adjectives along.If only they have shared it with respectively other in proclaim to put it together.911 was a angelic example of that.There were red flags that popped up at hand,but different agencies did their own thing instead of looking to other agencies for some of those answers.
The U.S.A. indubitably has the resources to avoid, or lessen the effects of some of these emergency,if and only if they can ever "take all their ducks surrounded by the same pond".
Acting first may economically be impossible in a NATIONAL emergency lacking a plan in place and an functioning menu to work from;

If_____ then _______
There are FEW "NATIONAL EMERGENCIES". That is the problem beside most people, they aim first to have the Feds bail them out.

Most emergency are STATE emergencies which should be handle by the STATE! FEMA should not even exisit unless there are more Federal than State Emergencies that go down.
In a broad scope, no, this is not a well brought-up plan. You should have at lowest a general outline of how to switch most emergencies. There will be some details that you in recent times can't plan for, or that no one every expected. These would enjoy to be dealt beside as the come up, then added to the plan for adjectives emergencies.

Am I a bad character?

I like to steal things. In yesteryear week alone, I must have stolen over 9000 dollars worth of different products. I be in a gamestop, and I saw an outdated copy of Battletoads sitting on the shelf, and even though I didn't really want it, I couldn't stop from putting it in my little brother's mudkip backpack. My brother is really little, and didn't really fathom out what I was doing. I took him near me and we were departing the store when this guy named Craltone Bonks, or something tried to stop me. I told him to **** past its sell-by date and gave him a falcon punch, and next got my little bro contained by the car and drove to my auntie and uncle's place. What do you adjectives think?
Answers: 1. Take stuff back to store.
2. Apologise politely.
3. Walk out softly.
4. ????
5. PROFIT!
I am a cop and I will sure do justice to you and your Ip address
Hopefully you are not surrounded by a library!
Sounds like you're a kleptomaniac. Seek professional comfort.
lol dont get caught
yes u r..
Oh you are doomed to failure through and through.
and how in the world can you bring your lil bro beside you and use his mudkip backpack as your equipment?!
what if he gets caught?
what if he's accuse?
what if he's taken to the police?
own up and accept your punishment, that passageway you'll learn.
lmao...i steal 2...its fun...i love it...lol..yor not a discouraging person
but dont ever ever ever steal from culture..<<<thats a no !
if u steal from people afterwards your a bad being...now from stores..no your not a fruitless person ! 4 existing
Kleptomania (Greek: "to steal" "mania") is an inability or great difficulty in resisting impulse of stealing.

People with this disorder are compelled to steal things, across the world things of little or no value, such as pen, paper clips, video, small toys, or packets of sugar. Some may not be aware that they enjoy committed the theft until subsequently. The majority of kleptomaniacs have preferences to sure items (again, usually subconsciously); for example, batteries or box remote controls.

Kleptomania is distinguished from shoplifting or everyday theft, as shoplifters and thieve generally steal for monetary good point, or associated gains and usually display intent or premeditation, while folks with kleptomania are not necessarily contemplating the attraction of the items they steal or even the theft until they are compulsed.

If you estimate you might have this disorder, see a psychotherapist or a doctor. It is a serious disorder which affects anyone, and it can be cured :)

Good luck!
i presonally think you are.
but anything helps you sleep at hours of darkness.
Craltone Bonks.
ha ha.
nice name.
I have a sneaking suspicion that you are stupid and a liar too.

Should a woman have be banned from driving for doing 10mph on the M32?

I infer so BUT this was her first misdeed with a previous verbs license so maybe a bit rigorous?
Answers: I agree, it does seem a bit low, but on a motorway, a dramatically slow speed can be as bad as excessive speed...possibly a fine and a bit of driver education would own been better.
Yes, I regard as people resembling this are dangerous on motorways and shouldn't be allowed on roads where on earth the speed goes above 30mph. Have you ever see how fast you approach a saloon doing that speed when you're coming up behind at 70mph? It's fearsome, you're on top of them contained by next to no time because your perception is that they are travelling at a similar speed, which as you would expect they aren't. So you end up breaking concrete and/or having to swerve to avoid going into the hindmost of them.

She reminds me of my father in tenet. He's getting a bit frail, he's virtually blind in one eye and is markedly a danger to other drivers, but he won't offer up his car. Sorry if this is not going to be popular but I ruminate older culture should be made to retake their test on a regular argument to prove they can still drive safely.
Yes
She's a peril to herself and to others. If you have ever driven 10mph you will know how other slow that is...And on a motorway it is sheer lunacy.

If you're not fit to drive and pose a danger to tohers around you, your license SHOULD be taken away
woo man i know women were slow, hell they shift to too slow and cause us bloke going at 'normal speeds to crash' i judge she should be banned for energy lol.
..seriously though it depends why she was going at pensioners step, but it is a little brutal maybe a hefty fine
Nobody should be disqualified for this but it needs address why they won't drive at the speed limit. As a woman driver I drive too nippy not too slow! These people infuriate me too!
This is a short time ago as dangerous as speeding within fact more so as it cause driver frustration which leads to accident. Therefore if you can get not permitted for speeding then you should seize banned for this.
Yes, she is a exposure to other road users...

Ridiculous speed, she correctly had the book thrown at her..
Yes she should the motorway rules state that you are excluded to drive a tractor,and other slow moving vehicles because they can raison d`¨ētre safety issues.
If the woman in give somebody the third degree wants to drive at 10mph on other roads to be precise fine but not a motorway.
She shouldn't have be allowed to drive in the first place! How did she endorse her test, why did her GP agree to her drive if she knew she have a phobia?

Yes she should be banned, she be doing 60mph below the speed limit...anyone doing 60mph above the speed ceiling would be banned too. Its purely as dangerous! Imagine coming up astern her at 70mph and not being competent to pull out cos someone is surrounded by the lane next to you? You wouldn't be capable of slow down in time. And obviously she would wind up other drivers which make them more likely to own accidents.

No wonder she be scared of driving, she's probably see a lot of accident.ones that she's caused!
I realize she admitted driving lacking reasonable consideration and repeatedly jammed on the brakes as she straddled the unyielding shoulder and inside lane of the M32.

Not unreasonable, I feel, surrounded by view of the circumstances. We adjectives know that driving excessively slowly (and there could be little more excessive than what she did) is extremely insecure.

In any case, it be only 7 days.
That be way too throaty in my feelings. She didn't kill/maim anyone, so what's the point of taking her license away?
Political madness gone bonkers I have a sneaking suspicion that.

Resisting arrest?

Lets say a cop arrests you for no defence. Lets say he is a racist cop. The cop make up something to arrest you for, so you are falsely anyone arrested which you resist the false arrest. You end up going to court for doing something you didn't do and for resisting arrest. Come to find out you are innocent of the false claims, which make the reason for the arrest false.

Are you still charged for resisting arrest, even if its a flase arrest?

Would you resist arrest if it be a false arrest? Why or why not?
Answers: Depends on the state, but I suspect the answer is yes, you can still be charged. Resisting arrest is not a derivative charge depending upon whatever phony charge the cop is trying to push onto you. It is an independent charge explicitly capable to stand on its own. If you enjoy nothing to make disappear and know you have not done anything wrong and that the charges are phony, what do you enjoy to worry just about?

No I would not resist arrest, but I will sue afterward in civil court if the charge be simply outrageous (depending on what it is). Remember though, police are still human and do make mistake, so with ease, they have plentifully of leeway and imperviousness from liability, so it is not easy to sue a policeman or PD.

It is within your best interest to cooperate because you are NOT in a position to negotiate when you get arrested, and that in recent times because you THINK the charges are false doesn't mean other those will agree. So it's best to cooperate and let the regard as being decide.
it probably depends on the point on the resist
if you were amazingly resistant then you might be charged still
but mostly likey unless you resembling ran drove away you probably wont

But i wouldnt resist
honestly theres no point because its so much easier and you carry in WAY smaller amount trouble if you are cooperative and do what they want.
But then again im training to be a Police officer
Most states hold a statute just for that doubtful scenario. Even if the arrest is totally baseless, you WILL still be charged with resisting arrest. And it will stick.

(I ain't the one making the rules, newly the one driving the squad around)
It is illegal to resist arrest, even if the arrest is totally false. If you are anyone falsely arrested, you can wallet a suit against the police department later on for compensation. But if you resist, afterwards you can be charged with resisting arrest regardless.

And besides, you may not know adjectives the laws. Unless you are a qualified attorney and know for sure that the arrest is false, it is best to not purpose even verbally. You will hold your day surrounded by court later.
Here's little behind the times you. Some big, bad police officer picks on you for some unknown sense. God only know there aren't satisfactory criminals or crime out there to hold the cops bizzy. The jails aren't full any .right?

So, this burly cop, who has a fruitless attitude towards you cuz he's discriminating is just looking for a opening to slam you some more. So you give it to him?
I don't infer so. Yes, sir, no sire, how high do you want me to bounce sir? You are out in no man's house, you wanna fight the gorrila group and adjectives their buds, by yourself, handcuffed etc?
What could you be thinking?
Best bet is to read aloud nothing, or at least possible be direct and polite, ask for an attorney if they start questioning you ...you're arrested already right? What's to lose except that very soon you got several charges against you.
You never want to fracas the lion in his den, on his turf and next to his big bad lion buddies holding you surrounded by their inner circle. Very foolish behavior.
Get real world. The sooner they draw from you to jail and you grasp some legal rep, the sooner you can strike support, if that is what you perceive you must do.
My limited experience make my skin crawl to even think of human being involved with arrest, incarceration and going to trial.
Keep surrounded by mind, that while there are copious good police officer, if you get the wrong one contained by front of you ...there is but a pig's whisker between that officer and a tenet smart criminal who could/would like to hold his way next to you if you give him any adjectives to do so.

Is it illegal contained by the US to call teacher at home?

When I was within the 9th grade my guru, Ms. Kroll, gave me surrounded by school suspension for calling her at home. And when I be suspended from CCSN (now CSN) I called my former english professor, Dr. Campo, at home and he asked me not to appointment him at home again.
Answers: It's not illegal, but it could be against university policy. Teachers and professors do have private lives outside of conservatory, just as you do. Would you close to it if the teacher call you at home to assign you homework?
You can't be suspended for calling (however did your call include foul verbal communication or threats?)...Teachers have like mad to deal beside and unless they leave you next to contact info...you shouldn't approach them at home.

Would it be considered cruel and unusual to horsewhip paedophiles?

Answers: All peado's should be dyed purple, then we could adjectives warn our kids to hold away from the purple people.
...
..
Well I am ecstatic to see so many family agreeing with it. It is my dearest aspiration. I would do it myself.
NO - actually I meditate that would be quite mild after what they have done!

The justice system should defo try it though - dirty bastards.
I reflect on the lord will deal beside them with allot more mercy than any of us revengeful humans can.

It is ashame about the crimes.
It would be if you did it after you castrate them, as it would be considered slightly de trop.

However, perceive free to do it before castrating them. Anaesthetic flexible.
nope
"pedophile"
It would be cruel and barbaric to horsewhip any human being. They needed to horeswhip the woman teacher contained by the Sudan for naming a teddy carry Mohammed. I would like to feel we are more civilised in this country. Not so long ago those who in a minute call for this sort of endeavour would have done like peas in a pod for homosexuals (probably still do). The Nazis were thoroughly good at this sort of piece.
no they should get every open-handed of punishment imaginable earlier having a impressively slow painfull death.
Not contained by the least, most of us would volunteer to do the profession. However it is too lenient a punishment, supply them to the parents/family of the victim and confer them carte blanche to establish the pervs fate. There would later not be so many of them walking around. As for God forgiving them..Well thats fine he can do that after we enjoy done with them. Bring it on!!!
Not cruel ample I would say
No, they may be kinky satisfactory to enjoy the whipping. Tie their hand together behind their backbone and place them in solitary confinement for 3 months so that they can't even delight in their own pleasure.
Not really but where would you stop if you started identify certain crimes for prescribing severe physical as a punishment. Thugs who see victim's heads within, those who use guns or knives when attacking anyone and groups of bullies who attack those who cannot defend themselves. I would prefer to see them adjectives housed in the most degrading circumstances wth a absence of all but makeshift facilities where on earth they would prefer not to see again for the rest of their lives.
Certainly not in my eyes. And I can presume much worse things as punishment.

More Questions and Answers:
[590] - [2495] - [1126] - [737] - [2256] - [693] - [1970] - [1814] - [1828] - [1897] - [314] - [341] - [2305] - [1116] - [1086] - [1903] - [1536] - [1547] - [1592] - [634]

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

Answer question: