Law Questions and Answers

I want to hit the raod! Why the hek not? except for my age!! It is so unfair!?

I am 13, I am towering enough to drive, I am sure I can if my dad shows me. BUT I AM TOO YOUNG TO GET A LICENCE. That imperative is the worst law contained by the whole world, I can be a responseble driver, I know I can.
Answers: Look, I know it seem really unfair right in a minute but, its the best in the long run of things( I know you don't want to hear that). Even if you are responsible satisfactory accidents come up! Believe me I know...
If you wait contained by a few years you can have a employment and then know how to buy things like I don't know gas...because I'm pretty sure your parents wouldn't buy you every cistern. Good things come to those who wait. Like I said I know you don't want to hear that but, to become conscious that you need to show your old age and get over it for very soon and wait till you can bring back your learners licence!
Responsibility and maturity comes beside age and experience.

Despite what you see in yourself, you're fixed to the experience and maturity of a 13 year aged. Placing you in a 2 to 3 ton vehicle that can move at excessive speeds would be dumb... and perilous idea.
There's a plea the law is what it is. You see it form solitary your perspective, but many accident happen from young at heart drivers. Don't rush it, once you get at the back the wheel, you are responsible for the lives surrounded by the car near you and any that you may hit.
That's too big a responsibility for a 13, 14 , 15, and many 16 year behind the times.
try and be patient.
I know every elder person say this to you but...Don't wish your time away! It is only 3 years, and trust me delight in your life within the moment u are in. B4 u know it u will be 20 wish u were 21. Enjoy living rent free at home while u can:

What can we do to prevent Drunk Driving period not lately on New Years' Eve?

After reading an article, I am simply devasted. An entire family wipe out due to a drunk driver who of course just suffered minor injuries!

"The 36-year-old mother and three children died at the scene.

A 6-month-old baby subsequently died at a nearby hospital.

The driver surrounded by the pickup truck is believed to be Michael Gagnon, of Adrian, Mich.

He suffered minor injuries in the crash.

According to police, he be driving at three times the legal blood-alcohol mark out."

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/14949...
Answers: Tougher laws and enforce them. First offense, lose your license for 6 months. Second offense, lose your license for ten years and spend five years contained by prison. Third offense, 25 years in prison and never know how to have a driver's license again. I know of a woman that lost her sister and became a quadraplegic from anyone hit by a drunk that had 17 previous DUI's. The law are a joke and aren't enforced.
You simply cannot. You would own to remove all the things that put together people drink. Shitty daylight at work, wife is bitching me out, kids are screaming about something, bills are pilling contained by, truck needs fixing, and etc. Alcohol is used to escape adjectives these scenarios.

Tougher law won't solve anything, it will just put ethnic group in a more shitty situation, and they will still drink and drive for like reasons.
I be thinking that bars and clubs can enjoy rest places for customers who are intoxicated that could sleep off the drunkedness.

Make it mandatory for patrons that are drunk;breed breathalizers mandatory in the bar and bartenders have the route to use them.

Have check points outside of bars and clubs.
Demand tougher enforcement of existing law and perhaps hold those in charge who allow a drunk to take control of a vehicle.

I'm particular Gagnon has prior alcohol related incidents. With a BAC of .254 this clown have obviously be practicing. Normal people can by a hair`s breadth stand up and say their own name at that level. If he have been deal with more severely faster on it MIGHT have be a deterrent.

If his friends at the party know they would be held criminally liable for his actions, first, he probably wouldn't own been allowed so much to drink and second, he would never own been allowed out the door surrounded by that condition.

But even with tougher measures within place you will never stop this from ever happening again. A drunk is not contained by his right mind and is still liable to try to drive, license or not, his own car or not, threat of draconian penalty or not. They just aren't expert of rational thought.
Welcome to my world. I've made over a thousand DUI arrests, and own assisted in several hundred more. Many of these included serious injury, or disappearance. Until a car is invented that detects alcohol/drugs, and refuse to start, or the crime becomes so severe that not a soul will want to suffer the consequences, you'll never be able to prevent it. You can't picture how many times I be asked, why aren't you catching real criminals. or hear the statement, I didn't assassinate anyone, did I?. People are devastated when they read an article, or see a video. How would they feel if they have to be on the scene, and witness it first hand?. I don't enjoy an answer. I did have an impact, but in a minute it's no longer up to me.

How do I go give or take a few getting access to the notes my psychiatrist have written about me? What is the tenet on this?

Answers: As from 1 January 2005, the Freedom of Information Act entitles you to request access to the information which it holds coupled with a right of access to that information. The rights to request and access this information are subject to some exemptions which the will enjoy to be taken into consideration before decide what information can be released. Under the Data Protection Act 1998, you are also entitled to access your clinical records or any other personal information held something like you. Your psychiatrist's secretary should be able to explain to you where to apply. Here are some cooperative links.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A...
http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs8-med.
There is enough crust law to show that the private summary of a psychiatrist are his property, and the patient have no rights to them.
You would have to sue, and show incentive why you need them.
Doesn't Freedom Of Information just pertain to public bodies? If I write information about my neighbour down contained by a notebook he can't use freedom on information to get be to show it to him. Doctors might be a different concern but I think within is a distinction to be drawn.
ok first off i dont know where on earth these people gain there information because its wrong!!!! yes, you ABSOLUTELY enjoy a right to those documents. afterall, they are about YOU! not your neighbor, your dog, your mom, its you and you enjoy right to that information.

This is how you do it. you write a formal request to the doctors office. direct it to the organization manager or the account clerk or even the doctor directly. include a line proverb you are requesting a "full and complete copy of your medical records, charts, resume, and any other documents pertaining to your care and treatment". you will necessitate to give your full designation, date of birth, social security number, and probably sign a waiver/release. and after wah-la the records are yours! :)
they will more next likly (99%) charge you for the records. its average. the law say to charge $1.00 for the first 25 pages and .25 cents for respectively additional page after that. when they receive recompense they will send you the collection. the letter should look something resembling this.
--------------------------------
DATE!!!!!!

Dr. address

Re: your name, dob, social

Dear Record Clerk/Office Manager/Dr. Such-an-such:

Please allow this correspondence to serve as my formal request for a true and complete copy of your entire record relating to my care and treatment. You may forward these documents to my attention at ***address***.

if you should have any question, feel free to contact me at ***.

Sincerely,
you.
------------------------------------

remember to include -social, dob, and nickname. keep a copy of the communication for your records. and anticipate it taking give or take a few a month.

:)
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 makes provision for the disclosure of information held by public authorities or by individuals providing services for them and to amend the data. The Data Protection Act is equally irrelevant because in that are exceptions concerning the disclosure of sensitive information such as medical records.

A more appropriate rememdy would be to request disclosure lower than the Access to Health Records Act 1990 which established a right of access to health store by the individuals to whom they relate.

Quick children in the age groups of 10 to 16 years who are terrorists who kill our benazir bhutto?

the gun wielding taliban the baluchistanis or the custodians of brands
Answers: Do what?
hmm in good health my brother thinks its the man who is adjectives ready within power... to stay in power... xD lol

And that they are simply using the taliban as a cover up :\
her own people kill her...time will tell

Is JURY NULLIFICATION the new civil disobedience?

Our law are too numerous, too harsh, some are unconstitutional, and this rubbish pile of legal code continues to grow respectively year as politicians run on a "get tough on crime" platform and pro-Three Strikes Law activist push their hate. Nowhere is within redemption and rehabilitation anymore.

And unless this impacts us individually, who is going to acknowledge this problem and oppose it.

I know in that are some out here who feel our law are too draconian, but know that civil disobedience will only turn those same law against us. Is the answer to over turn bad law when sitting on juries? To exerise "jury nullification", a seldom-mentioned right of adjectives citizens?
Answers: Jury nulification is nothing exotic American colonists were using Jury nulification to protest British law and many ofthe founding father notably Jeferson wrote going on for how states and juries could shift about nulifing law.
Lawyers practice law within court. Juries, in glorious profile criminal cases, in California, and some other states, seem to be to have other agendas.

We must remember that a defendant is Innocent, until proven guilty.

Another travesty of even-handedness is, to some extent, perpetrated by the medium. The media seem to forget this fact (innocent until proven guilty) on moment; ratings and circulation appear to be more important than a defendant's rights which should be protected until found guilty by a duly appointed jury.

One duty of citizenship to to answer the phone call to sit a jury. How may people try everything possible to catch out of said duty, then complain more or less a jury's verdict?

The USA is not unfaultable, but it is, in my inference, still ahead of whoever is in second place. The United States of America is, short any doubt, a land of opportunity. A lot of general public are leaving their countries surrounded by boats or anyway possible seeking a better place to live, but none of them are leaving from here. As Richard Jeni, may he rest within peace, said, "50,000 illegal aliens can't be wrong!"
Jury nullification is not contained by the Constitution explicitly. But it is a long-standing principle that a jury has to convict you. The ruling does not require the jury to say why they didn't do so.

I know that the one criminal jury on which I served would hold nullified a part of a satchel except that we had a compromise position available. It is call a "responsive" verdict, where on earth the jury can choose from two or more charges for the same crime and settle on if one fits better than the other. In our case, it be a rape. We felt that the rape occur and that the guy in press had used force to wreak the woman to comply, but the precise language of the directive didn't seem to cover "aggravated" rape. We have the option of "forcible" rape and agreed that be what had happen. We could also have chosen "simple" rape. Had we not have the options but instead have been fixed to "aggravated" rape or nothing, I meditate we would have nullified.

When you see someone going free on a serious charge, it is not significantly publicized as to whether a responsive verdict be available. Sometimes a DA will "shoot for the moon" and leave no other option open. One can argue that a nullification occur when in reality the overly zealous DA just overcharged the defence. Is that nullification by the jury or stupidity by the DA? To me it is a touch of both.

Is it civil disobedience? No, it is one of those "checks and balances" of our system - to stop overly zealous prosecutors from "throwing the book" at someone who clearly deserved a slap on the wrist instead of a life sentence contained by solitary confinement.
Jury Nullification is the only lawful way We the People can own a direct effect on how government works! Civil disobedience? More close to Civil Revolt!

Why are drug traffickers sentenced to death surrounded by some countries?

For a long time, people enjoy been duped to smuggle drugs minus themselves knowing what they are carrying. Enticed by "simple jobs" involving "just" travelling to a particular country and the promise of getting compensated a lot of money, these nation sometimes get arrested by the authorities, who will later sentence them to death.

Of slowly, a few cases have be brought to the attention of the public in Malaysia (where I live), two involving ethnic group in China and one somewhere within South America. These people are women, some are college students. And here I am, thinking, why are they going to gain killed? For mortal too stupid to get duped? And the girls grasp detained in prisons near men. I mean, whoa! Don't these countries own a more humane way of treating convicts? What more suspected convicts, who're not even guilty as contracted by the law or anything... Jeez!
Answers: they dont want anyone getting a piece of their goings-on because the govts themselves make their money from drug trafficking ... and thats in the region of the truth ..
Some countries know how to deal next to the drug problem.
Some people are too stupid and trusting. To be rewarded a large sum of money to get a small package to a foreign country would fashion most normal citizens suspicious.
There are places in the world that enjoy ZERO tolerance for illegal drugs, and anyone who tries to contravene the law, especially base on greed, deserves whatever they attain.
Evil governments hold a long history of "get tough on crime" policies which over-punish crimes for their own explanation of righteousness or to be taken more seriously.

We have some of this too contained by the U.S. No, not death penalty for smuggling drugs, but life sentences (Three Strikes) law for repeatedly committing petty crimes which the government somehow trumps up into felony.

Redemption and rehab has gone out the skylight, and that in itself is a crime.
Illigal drugs drugs is a serious problem and some counties treat it as such.

Some countries believe the right to live contained by a society free from illeagle drug use takes a difficult priority than the idividual's right to be stupid. Being stupid does not remove guilt in a chriminal conduct yourself.

The double dog dare defense has never worked resourcefully in the courts as an excuse to aid and abet criminal commotion.
The laws enjoy flaws too.

At this moment malaysian government is clandestinely revamping the drugs laws.As too lots of "bumiputras" are involved in drugs trafficking.

But the legitimate Mcoys aint the traffickers.As traffickers are only the agents.And some of them are innocent.As ably as malaysian polis are making hell lots of money by extorting small the time traffickers.
Death sentencing should only be palm off on the manufacturers.

Is it against the law to ween yourself past its sell-by date your Bipolar medications minus being arrested or detained if you?

And the personality who had Bipolar is not a threat to himself or others.
Answers: This one is pretty flawless. Please post a few more.

the answer, by the way, is I don`t know.
You are probably a very nice personality, but you are very noticeably deeply disturbed and seriously within need of taking your medication.
The fact is, nobody can force anybody to transport medicines if they don't want to, unless they are acting severely or a danger to themselves or others (and even later it's hard).
The person requests to themselves recognize they enjoy a problem, accept responsibility for that and their whereabouts, and then do doesn`t matter what is required to deal next to the problem in a constructive road.
Building a fantasy world where on earth all cops are evil, and the intact world is out to get you and that God and Jesus are going to come liberate you is not going to help your problem at adjectives.
You need to rob your problem seriously, and accept the professional give a hand which is being offered to you to give support to you. God bless you.
PS: You cannot "wean" yourself from anti-depressant medications any more than a diabetic can "wean" themselves from their meds - they would merely die.
Bi-Polar doesn't get better. Someone beside this condition must take medication for life span. If that person go off the meds, he/she become nuts again - manic/depressive - whatever the symptoms are.

A bi-polar individual off meds IS a vulnerability to himself and others.

One of the symptoms of the disease is the belief that "there's nothing wrong next to me" and the person go off meds..solely to become nuts again and have to be readmitted and stablized on drugs again.

I speak from experience; I own a 58 year old sister next to the disease. She goes past its sell-by date her meds regularly and, after about 10 days, she's spinal column in the nuthouse again human being stabilized.

Do yourself a favor (and others too), stay on the meds.
You sound without fault healthy. By adjectives means, don't tolerate those PIGS tell you what to do. Say no to the intoxication of bilolar meds.

Does the secretaryof an organisation have an imperviousness against the law if he loses the minutes book?

Answers: No. He'll be the first to be sent down the river.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Secretary of a corporation: a corporate officer. A smart Secretary would enunciate, "somebody must have stolen the corporate minute book--it's missing! Hey, my computer is missing too!"

The Secretary is not responsible the the engagements of some thief, or for things beyond his/her control: resembling a fire.

Then, if possible, a police report/fire investigator's report could be obtain and placed in the "New Minute Book."

Seriously: the corporate Secretary is responsible for the safekeeping and custody of the corporate minute book. The corporate minute book should never leave the corporate department, unless it is subpoenaed for legal purposes, and should be stored at the corporate bureau in a not detrimental place. Some corporations maintain a duplicate copy, stored surrounded by a separate special storage facility other than the corporate bureau.

If the Secretary takes the simply corporate minute book home, and "Fido" eats it, s/he may own a problem, not to mention one of legal consequences.

Is it possible for the people on Y!A to bring in trouble for recitation other people how to DL music illegitimately?

I've always wondered in the order of that, because especially in the Consumer Electronics > Music & Music Players cubicle where I swing out, there's a ton of people asking how to bring back music without paying for it. And there's other people relating how to do it. Can those people receive in trouble for that?

Thanks =P
Answers: Anyone can right to be heard anything on here, whether it's true or not. So, pertaining about someone getting surrounded by trouble for saying they enjoy downloaded without paying, probability are they will not get surrounded by trouble. But, if someone is telling someone else how to do something forbidden, they should be reported, and, if it is a valid case, their response or cross-question will be removed.
Technically, I suppose they could. Realistically, no. There are too many to track down.

If the relatives who have their music up make it so easy they should expect that's going to come about.
No
If I tell you how to label drugs, or tell you how to generate a bomb so to say. I my be investigated but can not be found at error for your actions. You chose to do what you want to do I in recent times showed you the way.
Another approach to look at it is if I told you to jump sour a bridge and you did it, it not my fault unless I pushed you past its sell-by date.
Yes. The U.S. Copyright Code has provisions dealing specifically near what it calls "contributory infringement."

Contributory infringement, requires (1) expertise of the infringing activity and (2) a fabric contribution -- actual assistance or inducement -- to the alleged piracy.

Is it true you cannot sue somebody financially if the money or value surrounded by question is smaller quantity than $20 ?

so i can go steal stuff not that i will
and receive away with it so long it isnt more thn $20
Answers: no, you cant take sued. but someone can still press charges against you for theft
You come across to have missed the point surrounded by your question. It is not the suing that is to say the bad subdivision of your thought , it is the stealing that is the problem. If you run around stealing stuff that is valued smaller quantity than 20 dollars. You will get caught by the police. You will stir to jail. You will earnings bail bond fees. You will pay attorney fees. You will settle up restitution. You will lose your job. etc etc etc

Oh never mind it does nouns like it would be financially viable confer it a try.
You might as well throw within mental stress and anguish to up it to $20

I think file fees start at $35 anyway...
uh...going to jail and getting a felony rap are not equal as getting sued; and guess what? THE JUDGE will order you to generate restitution.

YOu aren't on to anything here.
Attorneys are not interested in cases where on earth their share of the collection isn't worth their time and effort. $20.00 does not seize their attention. Small claims court filing fees are more than $20.00. It become, therefore, a issue of practicality. My bill collector, BIG BUBBA, would collect 20 bucks for me as a favor: his normal duty is a little more.

As for you comment about stealing stuff valued at $20.00 or less: don't even chew over about it; it's unfair. If you get caught, and charges are brought against you, you will enjoy a criminal record, even if you repay restitution: it's the act the courts thoroughness about the most and restitution does not erase the stroke.
While it may not be the best idea to sue for $20.00, a intruder who steals reguarly will be arrested for theft sooner or then and will land surrounded by the slammer.

It's not the amount necessarily but, rather, the travels that will get you surrounded by trouble.

More Questions and Answers:
[106] - [2168] - [1673] - [2318] - [2240] - [1991] - [2081] - [151] - [1245] - [1400] - [1065] - [1002] - [68] - [2161] - [2311] - [2013] - [2166] - [1878] - [488] - [1701]

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

Answer question: