Law Questions and Answers

Did I offend anyone when I ask for prayer for the policeman shot surrounded by the line of duty?

Answers: NO WAY! In certainty I commend you for your awesome morals and your kind behavior towards another human. I consider that it is wonderful that you care ample for people that you pray for them and ask others to pray for them. Good for you, we requirement more people similar to you in this world!! You should NEVER verbs about offending someone by asking for prayer. IF they own a problem, tuff ****!!! I think that it is time for Christians to quit worring nearly offending others, and it is time we take a stand, because they are amputation all of our rights! We are discriminated against and we obligation to stand up for ourselves so don't worry give or take a few offending others, they don't care in the order of offending you, and you have a righteous cause!!!!
Not piqued, per se. But it did make me lump you surrounded by a basked characterized "deluded" and not take any become aware of of your post.

Prayer is something practiced by those who believe in god/s. Because I believe that deity are an invention of man, I don't and won't pray. It would have be better to have asked family to keep the policeman and his house in their thoughts. That opening, those who want to pray can, and others won't simply dismiss your post.

Is being Violated by yahoo customer keeping a violation to our plain human right to freedom of speech?

Who creates the standards here?
I think its adjectives just a concern of personal discrimination from the Yahoo thought police.
Answers: Keep within mind that the so called "Yahoo Answers Thought Police" consist of a group of ultra liberal neoyuppies base somewhere in Leftifornia...They are extremely sensitive, self righteous, uninformed and hostile to any viewpoint even remotely conservative in character. Therefore one must expect to have virtually any and adjectives observations from the right side of the political arena to bear the brunt of extreme scrutiny up to and including suspension of accounts when an individually strikes the proper impertinence group.Take those clowns and the multitudes of liberal neosocialists hippy wannabe trolls that inhabit this site with a particle of salt. Further, don't pinch this crap too seriously...it is after all a activity...treat it as such and you'll fare much better.
legally they own the site free speach one and only applies to government i regard as it goes to far i enjoy been violate for questioning bush's policies

Under unsullied system user can be reliable reporters once u have reported adequate what they consider inappropriate you procure to pull dsown what u want eventually status can be changed but some stuff is pulled by other users
Hello,

First of adjectives, freedom of speech is not a human right. It is a strictly United States CONSTITUTIONAL right. Second of all, rules and regulations of a company (being Yahoo) that you are participating on outweigh federal "freedom of speech". In short, abide by their rules or they're going to see your *** off.
Yahoo does not believe contained by freedom of speech. They are liberals that believe in freedom of speech that does not slight their beliefs.

Basically, they let member do the policing and the only time they check anything is if you dispute it. Then their leftist beliefs come into play.
You do not enjoy to post here. Yahoo is a private company so they can delete whatever they want. Even though I hold never known them to be excessive to me.

Why do people who constantly Band M roughly Yahoo! answers even stay on it?
Probably, but this isn't designed as a site for free speech. And it is personal property, so whatever owner say, owner gets.

And the truth is, Yahoo! customer comfort doesn't really pay attention to it adjectives that well. If someone complains, they remove the question/answer. They don't do a unbroken lot of looking, they don't really have the time.

You put down thoughts and usually you can go and get away with it. Sometimes some punk or other among the other users can't pocket the truth or your opinion or doesn`t matter what, and you get a removed press or answer. Part of being on the site, simply you have to adopt it and get over yourself, or depart and feel polite that you stood up for your right to free speech (even if no one can hear it anymore here).

There are plenty of sites that do allow free speech as you want it, progress find one if you cannot deal beside this. Otherwise, do as I did and just adopt some people are course too sensitive and believe way too much within themselves; and then tolerate it go and maintain trying to express yourself.
You can say what you similar to. But that doesn't mean any one will close to what you say. There are consequences to what you say aloud.
I'd be careful here. There are some here who capture offended at only about anything. They're probably touchy I said this, LOL.
Yahoo isn't a governmental entity, so they can have doesn`t matter what rules they want. Last I checked freedom of speech isn't actually a rough and ready human right. In the US you have that right because it's surrounded by the constitution as the first amendment. It doesn't say anywhere that it's a serious human right.
Well, as much as we want to able to vote anything here, the rules are available to us so we can be proactive and decide what is suitable or not. I know, sometimes i still get violation and dont know why! I dont think that it would be such a **** if trolls be not putting on their bonoculars.
If the questions or answers are in community guidelines and the terms of agreement later they are not in contravention.However my husband has have three different accounts suspended this week alone with no vandalism notice whatsoever. The question he posed and the answers he gave be not grounds for such treatment but it happened purely the same.Was it report-happy users who didn't approaching his opinion or is it really nouns from higher up? I guess we'll never know.
It is an annoyance when you receive a ruin notice but it is not a vandalism of freedom of speech.

Yahoo Answers is the private property of the Yahoo Corporation and they alone set the standards for behavior here.

I get exceedingly angry when someone deletes my article or question merely due to my view but when I get sick of it I will bring my business elsewhere.

If I were you I would display this as a consumer issue rather than a human rights issue. Let the free souk work!
No. What makes you contemplate this is a public place? Just because it is on the internet?
This site is owned by yahoo. You want to play here, you read and agree to the rules.
The owner makes the rules.
Yahoo doesn't violate you...

We do.

The participant who "flag" you or give you "thumbs down" are responsible. After a solid number of these negative things, your information is automatically removed electronically.
Hi,

You Got That Right, Or Should I Say RIGHTS!!!

Is an expired driver license considered as suspended?

CA Driver license
Answers: No, of course not.

~ Suspended way the authorities took action against the licence to prohibit you from driving. Your licence cannot be re-instated until you fill the term of suspension, of clear up the situation that cause the suspension.

~ Expired just money your licence isn't valid because you were too forgetful or slothful to renew it. Normally, unless it has be a long time expired, you just travel in and renew it.

Either path, you can't drive, because you are not a licenced driver.

By the way, driving beside an expired licence doesn't necessarily mean you own no insurance. It depends on the wordings of your policy. If I forget to renew, and am in an coincidence, I am covered. I have an extended policy that have the wordings "qualified or authorized". It doesn't make it decriminalized to drive with the expired licence unsurprisingly, it just vehicle I get the ticket, but my insurance is still valid. If I have a basic policy, the wordings would be "qualified and authorized", which would anticipate expired licence, no insurance. You would have to read your own wordings, and/or check state or adjectives law to see how it applies to you, or if you even have such a provision.

I am a licenced broker and driver licence issuer.
No.

An expired license is subject to renewal.

A suspended license is the result of a legal, administrative bustle on the part of the DMV to suspend a driver's right to own a license, and their right to operate a motor vehicle in California.

For example, if your license have expired, and you were asked on some nice of form "Has your license or right to operate ever been suspended or revoked?", your answer would be "No". -- assuming your license hasn't EVER be suspended or revoked ;-)

Another difference is what is required to get a valid license again. In the skin of an EXPIRED license, you have to reward a fee and enjoy it renewed.

In the case of a SUSPENDED license, you want to wait until the suspension spell ends, then reapply (or doesn`t matter what the process is) -- or, in some instances, you can initiate an appeal to the suspension, and try to own the suspension removed.

In either shield, (expired, suspended, revoked) you cannot legally drive a motor vehicle.
Yes, it is not valid for the time mortal.

Can an employer demand that cell phones be kept surrounded by a locker or automobile during work hours?

Also, do they have the right to suspend and/or fire you for carrying a cell phone, even if you preserve it on silent/vibrate and don't abuse it by making lots of personal call? I know that employers are concerned roughly productivity, but why take cell phone privileges away when in attendance are just as plentiful people wasting time on computers (surfing the network or looking at porn when they think not a soul is watching) or taking excessive breaks to smoke outside! A cell phone may save a person's vivacity, but it is of no use if the employee isn't allowed to pass it!
Answers: Yes they can.

And if you brought one in to my shop it would be confiscated. You would solely get it support after it was 'sanitized' to NSA standards. (Which funds you will get some ash and melt bits of metal back.)
Yes, he can,
He doesn't involve a reason.
Remember, unless you are covered by contract, you can be terminated at any time, for any grounds, or for no reason at adjectives.
Yes they can, because they can make up their own rules and policies, and expect the team to follow them.

The reason they don't allow cell phones is that it wouldn't oblige with productivity. Sure, you may not use it, but probability are good that in that were a few other ancestors who did use theirs, and would drop everything they were doing to answer the phone up, even if they were helping another customer.

In other words, the company doesn't want to settle up you to sit around and chat with your friends, or risk that possibility.
yes and its wrong i be fired from a social agency ( well they feel so ) and the "social worker" who fired me smugly said i'm not telling u why go to labor dept and they are allowed to do that

unless its protected by constitution race religion etc or specific statute handicaped whistle blower they can do what they want
Your right to carry a cell phone ends the moment you are on the clock. It wouldn't be an issue if population had never assumed they have the right to use personal cell phones on work time. It is a problem in masses companies and schools. I be always allowed to pass a cell phone, but we needed them when we worked outside the office.
Comparing to other deeds is not useful, it make a person look childish "gee whiz, Johnny's wasting time on the computer, I should be capable of waste time on my phone).

If somebody is, indeed, looking at porn on work computers, by the agency, that needs to be reported to administration, not as an argument for carrying a cell phone, but on its own, as the company can be held liable if illegal objects is ever found on a company-owned computer. That legal problem could affect job, and indeed the very existence of a small company.
uh...if you necessitate to save a live at work...pick up a estate line.


They can disallow phones on the worksite; just as you are free to work at another company. YOU DON'T NEED A CELL PHONE ON YOU WHILE YOU WORK AT A DESK
Yes, they enjoy the right. You are not suppose to do personal business on company time.

If you have personal things to tend to, you can do it during lunch or on breaks.

And, yes, they can fire you for breaking the rules.

How do you fight a traffic ticket?

How do I scrap the ticket? I went into the court ultimate month and I said I wanted to scrap the ticket but she was close to you need to settle the ticket first so I asked for more time. I never heard of have to pay the ticket first. So what do I do?

Im suppose to turn in the 14th of January to settle up it, but I want to fight it.
Answers: try jump for traffic school if they offered you or request one, but usually with the sole purpose first timer get it. You can't really argument since cop is nearly always win unless you get witness.
Don't be afraid to sucker punch. People say combat dirty is wrong, but I'll tell ya, if it comes down to any you or that ticket, fighting dirty might anticipate the difference between walking out a winner or one down for the count...scissors typically work pretty well against traffic tickets also.


Pay the stupid ticket, and consequently go swot up how to drive
Law enforcement officers work shifts. Note the light of day you were issued the ticket. Then work a calendar to transcribe when and what shift he or she is on. Yes, it does hold true that IF you appear in traffic court on the time the officer is OFF duty and not present, you stand a break to beat the ticket.

However, this is a crap shoot. Politically speaking, combat the ticket CAN call for double the fine and who requests a cop w/ a "beef" against them? One that can AND likely WILL be watching you closely.

It's best to repay the fine and move on.
Forget it, your likelihood of winning are smaller amount than 5%.

Could I sue someone for this?

This didn't happen but...
could i sue if someone cut my mane without my green light?
Answers: :You can sue anybody for any thing. Doesn't suggest you will win! But seriously, yes, you can.
hmm. probably not.
but i think you should be capable of.
sure
F**K I sure would!! No one goes effective my hair for any explanation unless I give them authority to.
You can sue for anything, it doesn't mean you'll be awarded anything.
i guess it depends on the mental wits of the person because umm really would a sane entity do this?
It could be considered an assault.
yes you can sue anyone for anything
you might not win

but you can always sue them for it
yes. because that's your property and not a soul has the right to touch it short your permission

someone i know is a legal representative and one of his clients sued a girl cuz she took his patty bad of his grill while he was BBQing. he said that the pastry was his property and she have no right touching it. and he won.
Yes, you can sue. The crime would be 'battery'. You can sue for monetary damages, and likely win, if you suffered some financial loss because of it. So, if you have long hair and someone hack it off, you could sue for have to purchase a wig until the mane grows back, or you could sue for the cost of have to get your spike professionally cut to make it look wearing clothes.

If you livlihood involved need spine of a certain length or style, influence modeling, then you may sue for your inability to fulfill your contract.
You could supposedly, but unless it is a significant cut your claim will be dismissed.

I'm sure you can prove that they cut your hair, but what can you prove as far as a resulting unenthusiastic consequence?

This is a very gray nouns because if someone comes at you with scissors and cuts your fleece without your green light, logically you call police and they apprehend the individual. In this bag of a person adjectives your hair, and next you reporting it within a ratification of time or days, it is hard to prove that any significant sufferage occur.

I hope you're not thinking of asking someone to cut your hair, and next later claiming that it be non-consenting.
I wouldn't doubt it. it's your body and technically it could be seen as "damage" but I wouldn't hold my breath on this one lol it's funny to right to be heard the least.

What if the Federal Government required US citizens to get a National ID card underneath penalty of decree?

For example, if you were required to show this National ID card anytime you purchased something, anytime you traveled or be simply asked by anyone claiming to be an official. Would the invasion of your privacy be too much or would you be alright next to the government knowing everywhere you step and everything you do under the guise of national payment?
Answers: The government is getting more mediocre every time. That's undermining not only the privacy of the relatives, but it is undermining the Constitution. The Constitution even states that it doesn't want the government to bring back a hold of too much power. Yet, the people are to busy shopping, watching music video, eating, and when is it our turn to grasp a hold of our civil liberties hindmost? That's why many are starting to get up up and spread the truth. Im glad Ron Paul is on this ground delivering his message of freedom and choice. The people will once again revive our dear weak "living document". Restore hope for the people.
I own nothing to store. . . My life is an embark on book.

Personally, I am interpreting the new ID's to be a replacement for the DL's that are different from state to state, as all right as differ depending upon the time you got your renewed/originally from the state you reside. They would be all-inclusive so it would be cheaper overall for everyone.
I think that at hand would be a replacement of every elected congressman in the subsequent election - and the decree would be repealed the next sunshine.

Any politician who supported such a bill would be committing career suicide.

BTW - due to the disposition of my employment I am subject to government monitoring at any time. However, if I quit this living and find another career - I am a 'free man' again.
As near everything there are advantages and disadvantages to a National ID card. Let's frontage it, right now the state-issued driver's license is used as the de facto form of credentials and it is laughable how easy it is to procure one illegally. This is one of the most adjectives aspects of the American financial system and one of the main avenues to identity burglary.

Invasion of privacy? Please, private interests already watch everything you articulate and do. You are on a for profit service right now: Yahoo. They collect personal information and use it surrounded by various ways. Google maintain records of adjectives searches, I bet you own a credit card or check card, if not more. You must realize the genie is out of the bottle and it is surrounded by the hands of inhabitants who either outlook you as cattle to sell products to, or to bend your view to their desired goal.
In my assessment a National ID card would assist more to impede identity theft and other financial problems, would streamline the policing of our borders, and relieve the government to better protect us against threats. Is the American political affairs susceptible to corruption? You bet, as is any human institution.
I hold several passports, and travel extensively around the world. There are many things around the US I dislike. But I can honestly say here is no where else surrounded by the world I'd rather claim as my home. And my citizenship will other be as an American.
Do a bit of travelling, go to places contained by Eastern Europe where you own to register with the police (most trunk hotels will do it for you) for the night. Stroll along a street surrounded by Mumbai, or Bejing, better yet try doing business within!
In summary: I support the concept of a National ID card that could take the place of both the passport(s) and the drivers license.
I can add singular one thing to this discussion:


"Enlightened statesman will not other be at the helm. Grant no power to senate that you would not wish your worst enemy to wield against you."
-James Madison
"Comrade, comrade! I call for to see if your papers are in command!"

Welcome to the new USSR: America-style--if this system be ever to go into effect.

It's freshly the government's final answer to the pesky 1st Amendment.

(Like we ever used the Constitution anways...)
I get your point but a form of national ID is already going surrounded by place. Yes some states are fighting it but it center more on money than anything else. The states are argueing that it would be expensive so contained by fighting it they are warfare for federal funds. The states that do not comply by a certain date will not recieve federal funds of adjectives sorts and licenses will not be valid for nouns travel.

Some of the states that are fighting it own a large crooked population. The politicians know it will happen eventually but want to appleal to the allowed hispanic voters so they can say "hey, I tried".

How it works is adjectives documents and numbers have to be verified so here will be a federal database. Soon enough adjectives of the states will share information w. all of the others.

And already if the goverment requests to find you or know everything they can. They can access bank files, credit card info, phone bills, mortgage or renting records, employment archives and whatnot.

So in effect near will already be a national ID.

With the smoking ban going into effect on january 1st contained by Ilinois does that mean that nation that rent?

a reception hall for their matrimony will have to notify people they can't smoke?
Answers: Anyplace That is A Workplace Is Banned.
I would seriously hope so. I don't know who would smoke at a honeymoon. If I was at a marriage and someone on my table started smoking I'd walk out.

But consequently again, I'm in California, where on earth we've had these law for a while.
Depends on wether it is a public place or private. Also depends on location outdoor/indoor. Like some hotels still have smoking even next to the ban it is within the law. So you can still.

How do i put a lein on someones home?

i loaned my sister seven thousand dollars four years ago,to buy a car,so she could own a relaible car to drive to look in our mother,who was contained by the hospital at the time. Since then she have bought a home,a harley,and another car,lacking making any attempts at paying back any of the money i loaned her.HOW DO I PUT A LIEN ON HER HOME FOR THIS DEBT?
Answers: You would requirement a court judgment surrounded by your favor for the debt first in direct to place a lien.

http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectId...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_pla...

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Collections-L...
You can't.

You can take her to small claims court.

Driving a minor, when not a minor yourself?

I heard it be illegal, surrounded by California, to drive a minor around after 11 PM if you yourself are over 18. Is this true? If you know, I'd also love to know how you found out (i.e., your source). thanks.
Answers: If you hear it was iffy from the minor's parents then this is true. I found out by reading California Penal Code booth 272 and Welfare and Institutions Code section 601.

*/End of Line.
Check California law on http:www.findlaw.org. It might also differ from city to city.

More Questions and Answers:
[1618] - [1664] - [719] - [26] - [93] - [1709] - [1038] - [72] - [1346] - [2278] - [1816] - [2091] - [1501] - [1314] - [1042] - [1204] - [630] - [2172] - [120] - [2559]

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

Answer question: