Is there a reputable site I can go to search people's backgrounds to see if they have been arrested, committed crimes, ect, also, I would like one where I can pay a one time fee and search a number of times, thanks in advance!
Answers:
You can see the details of an actual background report. See "View Sample Report", here:
.http://backgroundsearch.com/name-search.
You can run a background check on her or him, then ask her questions to verify what you found out. If you want to be discrete, you can ask your questions as part of a social conversation when you are getting to know each other. Then verify her answers against what you have learned.
This is how to do your own free background check:
Like many answers, it all depends on the details:
What information do you want?
How much work are you willing to do to get it?
How fast do you want it?
If you are willing to do some work yourself, you can perform a background check on someone for free.
Criminal Background Check:
Criminal records are kept by the Clerk of Courts in each courthouse. Every city, town, county, state, and the federal government have their own courthouses. We know there are 50 states, 3000 counties, and over 30,000 cities, towns, or townships in the USA. That is a lot of courthouses, and most of them do not share their information. However, it is all public information, and you are allowed to review it.
If you know where the subject person has lived and traveled, then you know which courthouse records to check.
Do-it-Yourself Free Background check issues:
a)One problem is finding out your subject-persons lifetime travel history. He could have committed a crime anywhere he has ever been.
b)2nd problem is the amount of work you must do to check every courthouse in those locations.
c)3rd problem is that you could miss important records if you miss any of the locations that your subject-person has been to.
d)4th problem is cost. If the courthouse has digitized their records and published them on a website, then you can often review them for free. But if you must travel to the courthouse, that requires your time and travel costs. Finally, if you get copy of the record, some courthouses charge $1 per page. Wow! That can be expensive.
e)So a do-it-yourself background check may cost you a significant amount of money if you want to perform a complete background check.
Other Records:
You will probably want to check out some other records on your subject-person.
Do your want to know about:
Marriages and Divorces
Bankruptcies
Tax liens
Civil law suits
Professional licenses
Corporate ownership
Property ownership.
All of that information is public, and you can review it. But, you have the same issues that you had with the Criminal Records. The information is not all in one place. You have to find out where it is, and you may have to travel to those locations.
Information Aggregators
On the internet, some companies specialize in collecting all of this public information, putting it in their database, and making it available for instant access. For example, Illinois Youth Soccer (http://www.iysa.org) has a Risk Management publication that refers to:
http://backgroundsearch.com
You can review some of this information for free and get the results immediately on the internet.
How to Perform a Do-It-Yourself Free Background Search %26 Check:
Step #1 鈥?At an information aggregator, like BackgroundSearch.com , you can put in your subject-person鈥檚 name and find every city that he lived-in. That website provides this information for free. You can enter as many names as you like, as many times as you like. Now you know which courthouse records to review.
Step #2 鈥?At the same website, you can find a list of the Criminal Record Offices of every city, county, and state in the USA, along with their website (as reported to the U.S. government.).
Step #3.- Go to the courthouse website, or to the courthouse (if they do not have a website), and review their public records.
Step #4 鈥?Back at BackgroundSearch.com, you can find the Record Offices for Vital Records (Marriage, Divorce, Births, Deaths). Repeat step #3 for Vital Records and any other type of records that you need.
Purchasing a Background Check:
If you want to get a complete report, instantly, you can purchase a comprehensive background check from BackgroundSearch.com (or other information aggregators). Every company (without exception) will charge you something for a complete background check. The companies have to cover their costs to gather all of the public information, put it in a database, keep it up to date every day about everyone, and make it available to you on the internet for instant access.
Sex Offenders:
The U.S. government does keep a list of all convicted sex offenders in one place. You can find it here: http://www.nsopr.gov/
Good luck with your background check.
no
A good site is http://www.blackbookonline.info/. Click on the states and then choose your state. Most of the information on individuals is a public record. You can go to different court sites in different counties and get a lot of information.
US search is a paid for search engine. works pretty well but you have to pay.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Going to court??
im 16 and i used my sisters phone WITH her permission. she was aware that some of the calls were long distance. my mom said she would pay the $100 phone bill, but my sister said she is taking me to court. can she do that since im under age?
Answers:
She gave her consent for you to use the phone.
Further, anyone who deals with a minor does so at their own risk.
Your sister would have to prove damages. However, since your mother has stated she would pay for the calls, your sister has suffered no damages.
Her suit is baseless.
I would hope that you two can sit down and reason together without having to go to court. Blood is thicker than water.
She most certainly can you are not that under age were you can't be taken to small claims court,and what gets me is why would she do it in the first place since she gave you permission to use it and the she said she said rule, would not work in court ether the judge would see this as siblings getting upset with each other and probably dismiss the whole thing so why waste the time even to go to court but if she decides to take you to court you are 16 you are of age to go to court so don't think u aren't you'd be mistaken.
She can take you to court to the extent that she can have you served with a summons forcing you to appear, but - in most states - it won't do her any good. As soon as the Judge hears that you are only 16, he will - again, in most states - throw the case out because you cannot, as a minor, be held to a contract, hence cannot also be held liable for a debt. Your parents are the ones responsible, and since your Mom has already offered payment, your sister could be held liable for vexatious suit. Finally, your sister is not being very smart about this because it is going to cost her more in court and sheriff's fees than she could expect to recover in damages. Hope this helps.
Is that the same sister you're baby sitting for? Does she pay you? If not maybe she should reconsider that court thing. But didn't your mom offer to pay? Does she know that? Then why is she complaining?Maybe it's a sign that you should go back to your parents and work things out. Think about it.
Answers:
She gave her consent for you to use the phone.
Further, anyone who deals with a minor does so at their own risk.
Your sister would have to prove damages. However, since your mother has stated she would pay for the calls, your sister has suffered no damages.
Her suit is baseless.
I would hope that you two can sit down and reason together without having to go to court. Blood is thicker than water.
She most certainly can you are not that under age were you can't be taken to small claims court,and what gets me is why would she do it in the first place since she gave you permission to use it and the she said she said rule, would not work in court ether the judge would see this as siblings getting upset with each other and probably dismiss the whole thing so why waste the time even to go to court but if she decides to take you to court you are 16 you are of age to go to court so don't think u aren't you'd be mistaken.
She can take you to court to the extent that she can have you served with a summons forcing you to appear, but - in most states - it won't do her any good. As soon as the Judge hears that you are only 16, he will - again, in most states - throw the case out because you cannot, as a minor, be held to a contract, hence cannot also be held liable for a debt. Your parents are the ones responsible, and since your Mom has already offered payment, your sister could be held liable for vexatious suit. Finally, your sister is not being very smart about this because it is going to cost her more in court and sheriff's fees than she could expect to recover in damages. Hope this helps.
Is that the same sister you're baby sitting for? Does she pay you? If not maybe she should reconsider that court thing. But didn't your mom offer to pay? Does she know that? Then why is she complaining?Maybe it's a sign that you should go back to your parents and work things out. Think about it.
Godparents' legal rights?
My husband and I have a two year old little girl, and we are getting our wills done soon to ensure her safety should something happen to us. We have decided on a guardian for her, my best friend. However, our families are outraged at this and would probably try to wrest custody of our daughter from our chosen guardian should we die. Would establishing her as Godmother make her legal rights to our daughter more valid, since she is not a blood relative? If so, How would we go about it?
Answers:
Being a godparent is not a legal relationship. It is a relationship within the church. A godparent looks to assist in the religious upbringing of a child.
I would advise you to have properly drafted wills containing the appointment of a guardian of the person of your minor children. The courts will honor that appointment over the objection of family members unless the family members can prove to the Orphans' Court that such appointment is NOT in the best interests of the child. It makes no difference if the proposed guardian is not related by blood or marriage.
Your next step is to make an appointment with your lawyer to have your wills drafted.
Godparents have no legal rights but, you can name them to have custody of your daughter in your will.
Godparents is not a legally relevent concept. It is a church thingy.
The courts place great weight on the wishes of the parents in their will regarding custody no matter how much the blood relatives throw a hissy fit.
However, at the end of the day the courts will apply the best interest of the child standard.
At least that is how I understand it. Discuss it further with the atty who is drafting your wills.
Being a godparent does nothing legally. That job is really more of a religous thing where you are to help guide the child as they grow.
I would talk to the attorney who is doing your will. Perhaps if you write in some good visitation, you will be able to deflate things by indicating that if they attempt to oppose the will for any reason, they will lose the visitation rights.
Keep in mind that your families are hurt because they love your little girl and want her to be a part of their lives forever. Make sure that you take steps to ensure that this takes place.
And make sure that your best friend knows that stupidity can end this -- if she gets into drugs, alcohol abuse, etc. that the rights automatically default to a family member -- this will protect your little girl as well.
God parent's have no rights. You are wise in getting your wills done %26 spelling out who you want your child to be with if something unfortunate should happen. As long as the person that you've chosen is "fit" then there should be no problem. Your family is feeling hurt because they probably feel that you don't trust them or something. What are your reasons? Explain them to your family if you can. Your family could try to dig up dirt on this person should something happen to you but unless they're a "murderer or molester" then I don't think there's much that can be done.
My best advice is to call a custody lawyer %26 do a "free" legal consultation. Most lawyers offer this. That way you can make sure that your wills are "airtight".
You can also make a video tape of the both of you reading your wills when they're done %26 that way if it were taken to court upon your deaths, then the judge could see that you were making a decision under no duress and that it was truly your wishes.
If you have a properly drafted will, the wishes of your family will be irrelavent. Make sure that your wishes are clearly stated in your will and that the potential gaurdian is fully aware of the situation.
I'd up my life insurance just a bit to help with any possible litigation.
I'd make sure that the attorney handling my will is fully aware of the situation and adds any needed clauses to the will.
I'd also make sure that copies of the will are given to any unrelated parties that might come to your child's defense in the event of your death. The more people who know and understand your wishes, the better.
and no, naming someone a "godparent" does nothing. That is not a legal term.
***** You might ask your attorney if you can SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDE the ones who you think will try to get her. Basically state in your will that under no circumstances is it your wish for her to end up with Xxxx and Xxxxxx.
Answers:
Being a godparent is not a legal relationship. It is a relationship within the church. A godparent looks to assist in the religious upbringing of a child.
I would advise you to have properly drafted wills containing the appointment of a guardian of the person of your minor children. The courts will honor that appointment over the objection of family members unless the family members can prove to the Orphans' Court that such appointment is NOT in the best interests of the child. It makes no difference if the proposed guardian is not related by blood or marriage.
Your next step is to make an appointment with your lawyer to have your wills drafted.
Godparents have no legal rights but, you can name them to have custody of your daughter in your will.
Godparents is not a legally relevent concept. It is a church thingy.
The courts place great weight on the wishes of the parents in their will regarding custody no matter how much the blood relatives throw a hissy fit.
However, at the end of the day the courts will apply the best interest of the child standard.
At least that is how I understand it. Discuss it further with the atty who is drafting your wills.
Being a godparent does nothing legally. That job is really more of a religous thing where you are to help guide the child as they grow.
I would talk to the attorney who is doing your will. Perhaps if you write in some good visitation, you will be able to deflate things by indicating that if they attempt to oppose the will for any reason, they will lose the visitation rights.
Keep in mind that your families are hurt because they love your little girl and want her to be a part of their lives forever. Make sure that you take steps to ensure that this takes place.
And make sure that your best friend knows that stupidity can end this -- if she gets into drugs, alcohol abuse, etc. that the rights automatically default to a family member -- this will protect your little girl as well.
God parent's have no rights. You are wise in getting your wills done %26 spelling out who you want your child to be with if something unfortunate should happen. As long as the person that you've chosen is "fit" then there should be no problem. Your family is feeling hurt because they probably feel that you don't trust them or something. What are your reasons? Explain them to your family if you can. Your family could try to dig up dirt on this person should something happen to you but unless they're a "murderer or molester" then I don't think there's much that can be done.
My best advice is to call a custody lawyer %26 do a "free" legal consultation. Most lawyers offer this. That way you can make sure that your wills are "airtight".
You can also make a video tape of the both of you reading your wills when they're done %26 that way if it were taken to court upon your deaths, then the judge could see that you were making a decision under no duress and that it was truly your wishes.
If you have a properly drafted will, the wishes of your family will be irrelavent. Make sure that your wishes are clearly stated in your will and that the potential gaurdian is fully aware of the situation.
I'd up my life insurance just a bit to help with any possible litigation.
I'd make sure that the attorney handling my will is fully aware of the situation and adds any needed clauses to the will.
I'd also make sure that copies of the will are given to any unrelated parties that might come to your child's defense in the event of your death. The more people who know and understand your wishes, the better.
and no, naming someone a "godparent" does nothing. That is not a legal term.
***** You might ask your attorney if you can SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDE the ones who you think will try to get her. Basically state in your will that under no circumstances is it your wish for her to end up with Xxxx and Xxxxxx.
Give me your opinion if this is wrong or right.?
One day I went for a walk to the local outdoor swimming pool because it was about 30 celsius, after arriving at the fenced outdoor swimming pool it was obvious to me that there was many people sunbathing on the pool deck. People were also swimming in the pool, as I proceeded to walk and look around the fenced pool. A police officer on his bike proceeded to stop me and asked me what I was doing looking in side the fenced swimming pool area, because he recieved a female compaint "that I was gaughing at her.".,
-Now tell me your opinion weather,it was wrong or right that the complaint was made by the female.?
-Should the police officer have stopped me, why.?
-
Answers:
sounds like harrassment to me. if the fence wasn't meant to be seen thru it would be a solid 6' fence with no viewing possibilities. staring is not a crime.beside how would she know you were checking her out unless she was looking at you. you should have reported her too then.
well by looking at your name im saying it probably was the right idea
will be keep and care in open place
I think it was invalid, and NOT enough reason to question you. The officer should have observed for a while prior to acting, I mean... what's the charge??
ANY girl could easily have a wedgie up her butt and make a complaint, being overly sensitve and paranoid.
I think it was wrong. I would have been mad.
wow..that lady is an iddiot..first of all she was being a complete tatteltale telling the police officer that u were checking her out ..who cares.boys do dat
dat was so wrong of her
Thats ridiculous!
I have to ask, where you staring at the pool? But for how long...its a pool. So people might et the idea you were staring at whats in the pool.(not the water!)
It is unfair that the woman complained, because you wernt doing anything illegal. It is a public swimming pool and she was in a bikini, is she that niamh to think men dont glance at her.
It make me wonder, if you were a woman, would any of this happen?
This is called a field interview. The officer just wanted your side of the story so he/she has enough information to decided if what you did was wrong or not.
If you did not get a citation you were not wrong.
Personally, if a man was looking at me at a swimming pool, I would be very scared at the man. You can never be safe anymore, but if you were just scanning through the pool, then I think she jumped to conclusions.
I think the police was doing his job by serving her, and asking you what you were up to.
I just think you were misunderstood
If the police received a complaint, they have to investigate it. If it is a pulic pool, you are not breaking any law by by passing by and looking. If you are just standing there for a long time , then you may be violating some law.
If a girl was laughing at me, I wouldn't really care (unless she was laughing at the huge stain on the back of my shirt or something). We're you laughing at her at all? If you were, she should not have made the complaint like an 8 year old would.
He received a complaint. He needs to investigate.
What you didn't mention is what the police officer did after telling you that she complained about it.
Did he arrest you?
Did he prevent you from going into the pool?
Did he walk away and not do anything else after telling you?
In this day and age, any unidentified person who is walking around a fenced pool, not looking for anyone in particular, who does so for a protracted period of time, and does not enter the pool is going to raise suspicions. If you put 5 males and 5 females in that situation, one of each will eventually call to have the matter investigated.
I beleive there is more to this than meets the eye, Mr. EyeSpy. You say you went to the pool because it was warm out. You do NOT indicate that you intended to swim or cool off. Was there a correlation between the heat and the fact that there were probably more scantily clad people there than normal because of it? Why did you not enter the pool and join them? Why were you content to "walk around" and "peer through the fence"?
This behavior may seem innocent in an impersonal venue like freelawanswer.com , and many will disagree with me when I say that I do not beleive you are as innocent in this as you make it sound. In response I will ask "What if your ten year old daughter were at the pool?" I beleive the police office was right and I would have expected nothing less. Nor should you.
-Now tell me your opinion weather,it was wrong or right that the complaint was made by the female.?
-Should the police officer have stopped me, why.?
-
Answers:
sounds like harrassment to me. if the fence wasn't meant to be seen thru it would be a solid 6' fence with no viewing possibilities. staring is not a crime.beside how would she know you were checking her out unless she was looking at you. you should have reported her too then.
well by looking at your name im saying it probably was the right idea
will be keep and care in open place
I think it was invalid, and NOT enough reason to question you. The officer should have observed for a while prior to acting, I mean... what's the charge??
ANY girl could easily have a wedgie up her butt and make a complaint, being overly sensitve and paranoid.
I think it was wrong. I would have been mad.
wow..that lady is an iddiot..first of all she was being a complete tatteltale telling the police officer that u were checking her out ..who cares.boys do dat
dat was so wrong of her
Thats ridiculous!
I have to ask, where you staring at the pool? But for how long...its a pool. So people might et the idea you were staring at whats in the pool.(not the water!)
It is unfair that the woman complained, because you wernt doing anything illegal. It is a public swimming pool and she was in a bikini, is she that niamh to think men dont glance at her.
It make me wonder, if you were a woman, would any of this happen?
This is called a field interview. The officer just wanted your side of the story so he/she has enough information to decided if what you did was wrong or not.
If you did not get a citation you were not wrong.
Personally, if a man was looking at me at a swimming pool, I would be very scared at the man. You can never be safe anymore, but if you were just scanning through the pool, then I think she jumped to conclusions.
I think the police was doing his job by serving her, and asking you what you were up to.
I just think you were misunderstood
If the police received a complaint, they have to investigate it. If it is a pulic pool, you are not breaking any law by by passing by and looking. If you are just standing there for a long time , then you may be violating some law.
If a girl was laughing at me, I wouldn't really care (unless she was laughing at the huge stain on the back of my shirt or something). We're you laughing at her at all? If you were, she should not have made the complaint like an 8 year old would.
He received a complaint. He needs to investigate.
What you didn't mention is what the police officer did after telling you that she complained about it.
Did he arrest you?
Did he prevent you from going into the pool?
Did he walk away and not do anything else after telling you?
In this day and age, any unidentified person who is walking around a fenced pool, not looking for anyone in particular, who does so for a protracted period of time, and does not enter the pool is going to raise suspicions. If you put 5 males and 5 females in that situation, one of each will eventually call to have the matter investigated.
I beleive there is more to this than meets the eye, Mr. EyeSpy. You say you went to the pool because it was warm out. You do NOT indicate that you intended to swim or cool off. Was there a correlation between the heat and the fact that there were probably more scantily clad people there than normal because of it? Why did you not enter the pool and join them? Why were you content to "walk around" and "peer through the fence"?
This behavior may seem innocent in an impersonal venue like freelawanswer.com , and many will disagree with me when I say that I do not beleive you are as innocent in this as you make it sound. In response I will ask "What if your ten year old daughter were at the pool?" I beleive the police office was right and I would have expected nothing less. Nor should you.
Give me some good reasons to become a lawyer?
I'm starting to doubt this career path. It seems like too much work, with few benefits.
Answers:
If you believe in the justice system and would like to right the wrongs of the world and like interpreting facts and finding information it is a great career path.
Defense attorneys are an integral part of the system. Without them innocent people could be railroaded all the time. People seem to forget that our justice system operates on the idea that it is better for 9 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent man go free. Our system is a system of checks and balances. It is neither the job of prosecutor or the defence attorney to determine guilt. It is their job to present two opposite sides of a case and the judge or jury is charged with determining where the truth lies.
Also, people seem to forget that there is more to being a lawyer than criminal work. Lawyers help keep people safe when entering into real estate and business deals. Help get child support from dead beat fathers. Help people ensure that their assets go where they want when they die.
Its not for everyone and not all lawyers make a lot of money. Just as with any profession work ethic and capacity determine how much you make. I am a legal assistant and know plenty of lawyer who make less a year than I do. (Granted, I am darn good at what I do and they are lazy and disorganized.)
If you get a law degree and do not like like you can work in business, insurance, the civil service or plenty of other places.
You can help keep criminals on our streets.
If your parents were married at the time of your birth, you're not really qualified to be a lawyer.
Jokes aside, I wish I had taken that path. Lawyers serve an important (but sometimes distasteful) purpose and a good one can accomplish precedents and effect real changes in the law.
Lawyers make as much as a teacher or a millionair depends on how good you are, and who you know.
That's the best answer I can come up with.
You can be in a difference to make a difference. Find an area of law that you feel passionate about...it doesn't have to be in torte or contracts. With the world expanding and getting smaller at the same time; we are being faced with areas of law that were never considered before. Cloning, environment, what is going to happen when the baby boomers finally get really old... will our current obsession with "quality of life" obscure the natural progression of growing old and dying? While it is easy to think of many thinks as moral decisions, our lives are and will be guided by the LAW. How can that not be exciting?
Well you will be able to make a difference for a lot of people. You can make good money, become more confident when you are helping your clients, and you will be learning to focus on different issues. And you will make better choices and decisions.
You can make good money, you will probably always be able to find work if you're any good, and you can help put criminals away and keep good people out of jail.
It certainly is a lot of work. Heck just getting the degree is a lot of work. That said, you can make a lot of money. There is job security in being a lawyer (you can almost always find work). You can be your own boss (but that's even more work). Regardless of what the d-bags trolling this board will say, it is a respected profession. Without lawyers there would be no USA (of course the same could be said about Freemasons). if you get a JD and end up not enjoying the practice of law, you can always go into business. A vast majority of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies have law degrees.
I like practicing law most days. It beats the hell out of bagging groceries or filing TPS reports.
1.$
2.$
3.$
4.$
5.$
Money. It doesn't bring happiness, but it sure makes misery a lot easier to deal with.
Answers:
If you believe in the justice system and would like to right the wrongs of the world and like interpreting facts and finding information it is a great career path.
Defense attorneys are an integral part of the system. Without them innocent people could be railroaded all the time. People seem to forget that our justice system operates on the idea that it is better for 9 guilty men to go free than 1 innocent man go free. Our system is a system of checks and balances. It is neither the job of prosecutor or the defence attorney to determine guilt. It is their job to present two opposite sides of a case and the judge or jury is charged with determining where the truth lies.
Also, people seem to forget that there is more to being a lawyer than criminal work. Lawyers help keep people safe when entering into real estate and business deals. Help get child support from dead beat fathers. Help people ensure that their assets go where they want when they die.
Its not for everyone and not all lawyers make a lot of money. Just as with any profession work ethic and capacity determine how much you make. I am a legal assistant and know plenty of lawyer who make less a year than I do. (Granted, I am darn good at what I do and they are lazy and disorganized.)
If you get a law degree and do not like like you can work in business, insurance, the civil service or plenty of other places.
You can help keep criminals on our streets.
If your parents were married at the time of your birth, you're not really qualified to be a lawyer.
Jokes aside, I wish I had taken that path. Lawyers serve an important (but sometimes distasteful) purpose and a good one can accomplish precedents and effect real changes in the law.
Lawyers make as much as a teacher or a millionair depends on how good you are, and who you know.
That's the best answer I can come up with.
You can be in a difference to make a difference. Find an area of law that you feel passionate about...it doesn't have to be in torte or contracts. With the world expanding and getting smaller at the same time; we are being faced with areas of law that were never considered before. Cloning, environment, what is going to happen when the baby boomers finally get really old... will our current obsession with "quality of life" obscure the natural progression of growing old and dying? While it is easy to think of many thinks as moral decisions, our lives are and will be guided by the LAW. How can that not be exciting?
Well you will be able to make a difference for a lot of people. You can make good money, become more confident when you are helping your clients, and you will be learning to focus on different issues. And you will make better choices and decisions.
You can make good money, you will probably always be able to find work if you're any good, and you can help put criminals away and keep good people out of jail.
It certainly is a lot of work. Heck just getting the degree is a lot of work. That said, you can make a lot of money. There is job security in being a lawyer (you can almost always find work). You can be your own boss (but that's even more work). Regardless of what the d-bags trolling this board will say, it is a respected profession. Without lawyers there would be no USA (of course the same could be said about Freemasons). if you get a JD and end up not enjoying the practice of law, you can always go into business. A vast majority of CEOs of Fortune 500 companies have law degrees.
I like practicing law most days. It beats the hell out of bagging groceries or filing TPS reports.
1.$
2.$
3.$
4.$
5.$
Money. It doesn't bring happiness, but it sure makes misery a lot easier to deal with.
Give me one best update on My Expectation & Limitation?
do so
Answers:
Consider yourself updated.
do your duty don't- expect any benefit for it
This question has been listed under 'law %26 ethics' category. So I tried my best, to understand the question. But in the absence of any relevant fact, no assessment of issue involved,if any, has been possible.
It can just be stated:
There is a law of limitation in India (as well as several countries). The limitation is to be calculated depending upon the facts and circumstances, in each case.
There is no law of expectations. But in jurisprudence, there is a "doctrine of legitimate expectations". When pleaded, the court will examine the facts and circumstanes of the case, in the light of applicability of this doctrine.
If, a matter of law is what is meant, please repost,with adequate facts. If relating to any other subject, please repost with proper details, proper question and proper grammar., and also specifying the category.
Read Bhagavad-gita. In Sanskrit it is like this...
Karmanye vadhika raste ma faleshu kadachan! Do your work (honestly) without expecting what the fruit/gain will be. That's not ur look-out, God will take care of it.
Hi,
One does not know the 'limitations' of a person except in the 100 and 200 Metres races... As far as your expectations are concerned; though it may be rather trite to say so, but only you can assess them. You can of course make an informed judgement based on your motivation, work, resources, your capacity to take risks, ability to handle failure and so on.
Regards,
Anjum
Answers:
Consider yourself updated.
do your duty don't- expect any benefit for it
This question has been listed under 'law %26 ethics' category. So I tried my best, to understand the question. But in the absence of any relevant fact, no assessment of issue involved,if any, has been possible.
It can just be stated:
There is a law of limitation in India (as well as several countries). The limitation is to be calculated depending upon the facts and circumstances, in each case.
There is no law of expectations. But in jurisprudence, there is a "doctrine of legitimate expectations". When pleaded, the court will examine the facts and circumstanes of the case, in the light of applicability of this doctrine.
If, a matter of law is what is meant, please repost,with adequate facts. If relating to any other subject, please repost with proper details, proper question and proper grammar., and also specifying the category.
Read Bhagavad-gita. In Sanskrit it is like this...
Karmanye vadhika raste ma faleshu kadachan! Do your work (honestly) without expecting what the fruit/gain will be. That's not ur look-out, God will take care of it.
Hi,
One does not know the 'limitations' of a person except in the 100 and 200 Metres races... As far as your expectations are concerned; though it may be rather trite to say so, but only you can assess them. You can of course make an informed judgement based on your motivation, work, resources, your capacity to take risks, ability to handle failure and so on.
Regards,
Anjum
Give me freedom?
What degree of freedom do you feel is fair to surrender for a fair degree of security?
Answers:
None, I feel less safe when I have less liberties.
Making me less vulnerable to a perceived threat makes me more vulnerable to a known threat.
Considering I have nothing to hide, I have no issue with wiretapping or things like that. I know I won't get in trouble for anything I say or do because I respect and follow the law. So, that would not make me lose any freedoms at all.
That said, I think unless there is reasonable suspicion of someone, they should not be tapped or spied upon.
None. Then again, I have given up no freedoms.
Zero. The government would like you to think that the only way they can protect you fully is by infringing on some of your civil liberties, but that just ain't true.
0%
the society that gives up freedom for security deserves neither freedom or security.. (B Franklin) if memory serves.
None we have when down a path of no return. The government will take more and more from the people. freedom is gone you have people looking through your private thinks and we undress before all we have any and everyone knowing your address, license numbers and social security numbers and your telephone. You call that being secure Thing again. Look at all the stolen Identies
The major problem with giving up rights or freedom if you will is, the more control you give an entity over you the more control they want.
With the porkbarrel politics we have, the first 2 or 3 items on the agenda are necessary but item 3 will be, for an example, a clause that says that this can be amended at any time without further discussion. What if all of a sudden, the brain trust decided that everyone's calls should be monitored? You've just lost the right to privacy. What if the cops can kick your door in without a warrant or notice, or for what they think is suspicious activity?
While we do need some type of protection plan, don't be a scared sheep and just agree to whatever is put in front of you. Think about what this "COULD" mean in the long run.
This is how the government gets most of their policies in place. I am not anti-American or government, but those in charge have to be kept in their place too, or you have a monarchy.
From a purely legal stand I don't feel that what the government knows about me is wrong.
But if this knowledge is in the hands of some one who would use it for their own ends %26 against my best interest I oppose it.
While I have nothing to hide about my self.
I say that if the some one is going to use the government to find out more about me that they should take the legal steps to do so. The blanket collection of information on every one is not in the best interest of a free society.
Answers:
None, I feel less safe when I have less liberties.
Making me less vulnerable to a perceived threat makes me more vulnerable to a known threat.
Considering I have nothing to hide, I have no issue with wiretapping or things like that. I know I won't get in trouble for anything I say or do because I respect and follow the law. So, that would not make me lose any freedoms at all.
That said, I think unless there is reasonable suspicion of someone, they should not be tapped or spied upon.
None. Then again, I have given up no freedoms.
Zero. The government would like you to think that the only way they can protect you fully is by infringing on some of your civil liberties, but that just ain't true.
0%
the society that gives up freedom for security deserves neither freedom or security.. (B Franklin) if memory serves.
None we have when down a path of no return. The government will take more and more from the people. freedom is gone you have people looking through your private thinks and we undress before all we have any and everyone knowing your address, license numbers and social security numbers and your telephone. You call that being secure Thing again. Look at all the stolen Identies
The major problem with giving up rights or freedom if you will is, the more control you give an entity over you the more control they want.
With the porkbarrel politics we have, the first 2 or 3 items on the agenda are necessary but item 3 will be, for an example, a clause that says that this can be amended at any time without further discussion. What if all of a sudden, the brain trust decided that everyone's calls should be monitored? You've just lost the right to privacy. What if the cops can kick your door in without a warrant or notice, or for what they think is suspicious activity?
While we do need some type of protection plan, don't be a scared sheep and just agree to whatever is put in front of you. Think about what this "COULD" mean in the long run.
This is how the government gets most of their policies in place. I am not anti-American or government, but those in charge have to be kept in their place too, or you have a monarchy.
From a purely legal stand I don't feel that what the government knows about me is wrong.
But if this knowledge is in the hands of some one who would use it for their own ends %26 against my best interest I oppose it.
While I have nothing to hide about my self.
I say that if the some one is going to use the government to find out more about me that they should take the legal steps to do so. The blanket collection of information on every one is not in the best interest of a free society.
Girlfriend moved to bad part of town?
My girlfrined and I live apart and will be doing so for the next 2 years. She is living alone in a bad part of town. She has been trained in self defense (resently) but she is still a little uneasy in her appartment. A dog is out of the question (she works all day). A hand gun is out of the question (neighbors and thin walls). I even concidered a shotgun with bean bag rounds (they can be leathal) but honestly I don't think a gun is the answer for her. She didn't grow up with them as I did. Anyone have any ideas? I am sure I am not the first guy to be in this situation. I welcome all sugestions. I have ofcourse changed the locks, taken the name of the post office box, checked the bars on the windows, and all the other safety measures. I just feel as if I am missing a plan B. Short of a basball bat with a fancy laser sight (laser sight to scare them and if they can see that doesn't work atleasst she has a bat) I frankly could use some ideas.
A sawed off worth the felloney?
Answers:
Hi! Make sure she has pepper spray in her purse, by the door ,in the bathroom. Every were you can think of putting it more than 1 bottle is best. Give her something that makes noise with out much effort but that can be heard by a neighbor in case something happens they can be anoyed and look in or call the cops. Plus pray to God to protected her.God Bless
First... get her a top notch chastity belt so that if someone tries to rape her... it'll be really tough to get it off.
Second, tell her to rub feces on her body everyday. Most rapists won't go near a chick they think has soiled herself.
And finally, tell her to join a gang. If she's a member, she'll be protected from rival gangs.
i dont mean to scare here but bars on windows have negative effects too. people get trapped in their houses with those things, fires and such. no a sawed of isnt worth a felony. not a good idea. try an alarm system and yea i guess a bat would be good. no laser sight needed. :P
You sound like a thoughtful, caring boyfriend. :-) You're probably right that a gun isn't the answer.
A few other minor precautions she can take: door-braces and alarms are cheap: http://www.defensedevices.com/doorstopal... and http://www.defensedevices.com/bigjamdoor...
Mace or pepper spray (whatever's legal in your state) when she's outside of the apartment.
a handgun is ABSOLUTELY the right answer
If she plugs an intruder she might also get a pesky neighbor at the same time
A Win- Win!
A sawed off worth the felloney?
Answers:
Hi! Make sure she has pepper spray in her purse, by the door ,in the bathroom. Every were you can think of putting it more than 1 bottle is best. Give her something that makes noise with out much effort but that can be heard by a neighbor in case something happens they can be anoyed and look in or call the cops. Plus pray to God to protected her.God Bless
First... get her a top notch chastity belt so that if someone tries to rape her... it'll be really tough to get it off.
Second, tell her to rub feces on her body everyday. Most rapists won't go near a chick they think has soiled herself.
And finally, tell her to join a gang. If she's a member, she'll be protected from rival gangs.
i dont mean to scare here but bars on windows have negative effects too. people get trapped in their houses with those things, fires and such. no a sawed of isnt worth a felony. not a good idea. try an alarm system and yea i guess a bat would be good. no laser sight needed. :P
You sound like a thoughtful, caring boyfriend. :-) You're probably right that a gun isn't the answer.
A few other minor precautions she can take: door-braces and alarms are cheap: http://www.defensedevices.com/doorstopal... and http://www.defensedevices.com/bigjamdoor...
Mace or pepper spray (whatever's legal in your state) when she's outside of the apartment.
a handgun is ABSOLUTELY the right answer
If she plugs an intruder she might also get a pesky neighbor at the same time
A Win- Win!
Girlfriend hates that the boyfriend smokes weed?
I've been smoking since 16. She hates that I smoke weed. Sometimes I smoke a couple times a day, other times I don't smoke. I go to work, pay my bills. I have friends and family I love and take her places. But we just got back from a holiday during which I didn't smoke, and after finishing the chores and going thru the bills I started dinner and smoked a roach while she set the table. Now she's given me an ultimatum and she's serious cuz it took her a full hour of arguing and yelling to deliver it. I don't like her yelling. but I have to be honest I told her I can't commit to not doing it. We're supposed to celebrate our 3 month anniversary.
Answers:
if you really love her then why are you smoking if you want to live along live with your girlfreind then get help evry time you smoke weed your just flushing your life down the drain
Grow up and quit smoking weed. If you care enough about her and her feelings then you'll quit. Who knows...you may spare a few brain cells. You might thank her for that.
Break up with her. I dated a stoner for 3 years and it's the worst thing I've ever done. I gave him the ultimatum several times, but never followed through with it. Now I regret every minute of being with that loser.
It's all about priorities. Which one do you value more?
well you and her should talk about it ,and try to come up with
a solution.
Hmmmm. You have a girlfriend that I'll assume you love, and you love smoking dope. You have to give up one or the other.
Girlfriend, or dope?
Girlfriend, or dope?
Girlfriend, or dope?
I'd say give up the weed. I might be wrong, but companionship, love, and sexual activity that doesn't require looking at a magazine while you use Mr. Hand trumps smoking weed.
On the other hand, I might be off-base.
This is probably a good indication that you two have differences that won't work out. I'm not going to sit here and preach to you about drugs since you don't appear to be endangering anyone but yourself. But you clearly have two different viewpoints on weed. This is probably an indication that you are not right together since a big part of your life seems to really bother her.
Dump her. You don't need that crap in your life. Instead find someone else who shares your passions, but won't go through all of your stash.
you really need to ask?
give it up!! you could die!
I don't think this is going to work for you. Find a girl who atleast doesn't mind that you smoke it. Relationships are all about compatibility - you wouldn't pair a dog hater with someone who works in animal rescue.
I think she see's somthing she is more happy with when your not smoking, either your more happier or you seem like yourself more to her, and when you smoke your giving less of yourself to her, i.e not enuff, too bad you should have never stopped smoking lol, she will obviusly leave you if you dont, i think, maybe you can come to an aggrement where you only smoke like once a week on friday, or maybe once every two weeks or once a month, or once a day i dont know, try and work somthing out, but i dont think she likes seeing you high,,,,,
Grow up. smoking does nothing but kill you. and makes you loose things. such as yer girlfriend. what do you like more? weed or her? if you love her you would do anything for her. including giving up weed. loose the weed before you loose her.
She's smart. No one wants to be around a pothead. I hope you listen to her and change your life. You are headed for a life of problems otherwise. Can't you choose between a good woman and a disgusting habit? That ought to tell you something right there.
in relationships the big question is always the same..
"Do you Love him/her Enough ?"
tell your girle friend that it is somthing you do and can not quit so easiley and that you want to keep a relationshoip with her and tell her that if it will make things easyer that you will not smoke around her and just let her know it is an addicting drug and you cant just quit in five seconds tell her you cant help it youv don it almost all your life and plenty of relationships hav survived with mates smoking and the other not
"you go to work" "you pay your bills" sounds like you're a good guy..Just one with not a lot of initiative. You're just cruising through life. If you think your girlfriend is focused on the pot, she's not..The pot is just the obvious symbol of what's really her problem with you. She's subconsciously
sizing you up as all females do for a husband, and a suitable father to her child, she seeks an alpha male with prowess; POT takes those sharp agressive tendencies away. No way around it dude. You need to make a choice, but however it plays you will have the same issues again in another relatinship.
I smoked weed for 20 years, then I met "HER". She didn't approve (on many levels, but mostly it was the going to jail part) SO, I quit "hanging out" with my old pot-smoking buddies %26 here it is over 10 years later. I am in love with her %26 although I still think about how I used to smoke pot I don't miss it... well, maybe a little, but "SHE" is way more important than getting high.
We quit smoking cigarettes too, together %26 it's been like 8 or 9 years, I can't even remember anymore.
ALL I KNOW IS THAT QUITTING POT WAS LIKE... CLIPPING MY FINGERNAILS BUT QUITTING CIGS WAS LIKE SAWING OFF MY OWN THUMB WITH A SERRATED KNIFE!!!!!
Think that over.
In the scope of life, weed is really a small problem. Meth, girls on the side, now those are issues. Altho I am an advocate, it makes me biased, but I have always thought weed was better than alcohol or any drug. I don't classify weed as a drug. It is my medicine. All that being said, I have never in my life seen anyone "wig out" on weed. An occasional roach is not going to kill anyone and if it helps with the stress this world puts out these days, I say go for it. Maybe it's good you learn this early in the relationship so if it's a deal breaker for her then you will know. Screaming should be an indicator she is not willing to budge, and if she does, she will only look down her nose at you every time you do it, and judge you. You have to decide if it is all worth it, or if you should find someone who appreciates you just the way you are.
If I were her I would drop you like a hot spud
You need to weight the good and the bad for both and see hich one has more good and stick with that choice.
Get a new girlfriend
if she really loved you she'd look past the weed
we all do things other people dont 'agree with'
but in a relationship we get over it, and love each other anyhow
girls ALWAYS pull this shi.t they date guys with some sort of problem they dont like and try to "FIX" them
and as soon as they get you "perfect" they get board and dump you anyhow
hey weed's always been there for you
she doesn't bi.tch about sh.it and get all whiny
how many girlfriends have you had in your life? one more wont hurt
...face the truth ! ...your a "pot" head and she wants something more........
the two of you will not last becouse you smok and she dos not
Answers:
if you really love her then why are you smoking if you want to live along live with your girlfreind then get help evry time you smoke weed your just flushing your life down the drain
Grow up and quit smoking weed. If you care enough about her and her feelings then you'll quit. Who knows...you may spare a few brain cells. You might thank her for that.
Break up with her. I dated a stoner for 3 years and it's the worst thing I've ever done. I gave him the ultimatum several times, but never followed through with it. Now I regret every minute of being with that loser.
It's all about priorities. Which one do you value more?
well you and her should talk about it ,and try to come up with
a solution.
Hmmmm. You have a girlfriend that I'll assume you love, and you love smoking dope. You have to give up one or the other.
Girlfriend, or dope?
Girlfriend, or dope?
Girlfriend, or dope?
I'd say give up the weed. I might be wrong, but companionship, love, and sexual activity that doesn't require looking at a magazine while you use Mr. Hand trumps smoking weed.
On the other hand, I might be off-base.
This is probably a good indication that you two have differences that won't work out. I'm not going to sit here and preach to you about drugs since you don't appear to be endangering anyone but yourself. But you clearly have two different viewpoints on weed. This is probably an indication that you are not right together since a big part of your life seems to really bother her.
Dump her. You don't need that crap in your life. Instead find someone else who shares your passions, but won't go through all of your stash.
you really need to ask?
give it up!! you could die!
I don't think this is going to work for you. Find a girl who atleast doesn't mind that you smoke it. Relationships are all about compatibility - you wouldn't pair a dog hater with someone who works in animal rescue.
I think she see's somthing she is more happy with when your not smoking, either your more happier or you seem like yourself more to her, and when you smoke your giving less of yourself to her, i.e not enuff, too bad you should have never stopped smoking lol, she will obviusly leave you if you dont, i think, maybe you can come to an aggrement where you only smoke like once a week on friday, or maybe once every two weeks or once a month, or once a day i dont know, try and work somthing out, but i dont think she likes seeing you high,,,,,
Grow up. smoking does nothing but kill you. and makes you loose things. such as yer girlfriend. what do you like more? weed or her? if you love her you would do anything for her. including giving up weed. loose the weed before you loose her.
She's smart. No one wants to be around a pothead. I hope you listen to her and change your life. You are headed for a life of problems otherwise. Can't you choose between a good woman and a disgusting habit? That ought to tell you something right there.
in relationships the big question is always the same..
"Do you Love him/her Enough ?"
tell your girle friend that it is somthing you do and can not quit so easiley and that you want to keep a relationshoip with her and tell her that if it will make things easyer that you will not smoke around her and just let her know it is an addicting drug and you cant just quit in five seconds tell her you cant help it youv don it almost all your life and plenty of relationships hav survived with mates smoking and the other not
"you go to work" "you pay your bills" sounds like you're a good guy..Just one with not a lot of initiative. You're just cruising through life. If you think your girlfriend is focused on the pot, she's not..The pot is just the obvious symbol of what's really her problem with you. She's subconsciously
sizing you up as all females do for a husband, and a suitable father to her child, she seeks an alpha male with prowess; POT takes those sharp agressive tendencies away. No way around it dude. You need to make a choice, but however it plays you will have the same issues again in another relatinship.
I smoked weed for 20 years, then I met "HER". She didn't approve (on many levels, but mostly it was the going to jail part) SO, I quit "hanging out" with my old pot-smoking buddies %26 here it is over 10 years later. I am in love with her %26 although I still think about how I used to smoke pot I don't miss it... well, maybe a little, but "SHE" is way more important than getting high.
We quit smoking cigarettes too, together %26 it's been like 8 or 9 years, I can't even remember anymore.
ALL I KNOW IS THAT QUITTING POT WAS LIKE... CLIPPING MY FINGERNAILS BUT QUITTING CIGS WAS LIKE SAWING OFF MY OWN THUMB WITH A SERRATED KNIFE!!!!!
Think that over.
In the scope of life, weed is really a small problem. Meth, girls on the side, now those are issues. Altho I am an advocate, it makes me biased, but I have always thought weed was better than alcohol or any drug. I don't classify weed as a drug. It is my medicine. All that being said, I have never in my life seen anyone "wig out" on weed. An occasional roach is not going to kill anyone and if it helps with the stress this world puts out these days, I say go for it. Maybe it's good you learn this early in the relationship so if it's a deal breaker for her then you will know. Screaming should be an indicator she is not willing to budge, and if she does, she will only look down her nose at you every time you do it, and judge you. You have to decide if it is all worth it, or if you should find someone who appreciates you just the way you are.
If I were her I would drop you like a hot spud
You need to weight the good and the bad for both and see hich one has more good and stick with that choice.
Get a new girlfriend
if she really loved you she'd look past the weed
we all do things other people dont 'agree with'
but in a relationship we get over it, and love each other anyhow
girls ALWAYS pull this shi.t they date guys with some sort of problem they dont like and try to "FIX" them
and as soon as they get you "perfect" they get board and dump you anyhow
hey weed's always been there for you
she doesn't bi.tch about sh.it and get all whiny
how many girlfriends have you had in your life? one more wont hurt
...face the truth ! ...your a "pot" head and she wants something more........
the two of you will not last becouse you smok and she dos not
Gf found a cell phone. cant find owner . can she now get it re started and use it?
she is all worried that someone will say she stole it. she just found it . the person cancelled the service the same day so we could not call them or one of there contacts to give the phone back . now i think she should be able to start a new acct. and use that phone what do you think she should do
Answers:
just get a new sim card and ifs fully functional...the phone must be able to support the network though.
Actually, you need to go a step further. The owner may have canceled the service but you can indeed call the numbers on the phone. It's called a land line. You do not have to call from the cell phone. Just turn on and open address book to find the numbers and call from your house. It is the least you can do before claiming it as your own. If you honestly go though all the numbers and sincerely search those numbers for the owner and get no results then I would say it is your.
You always do what is best so that you can live in your own skin.
Try to find the owner first. Check for saved numbers such as 'Home' , 'mom', etc. If you cannot access anything (in the event the phone has a sim card that has been deactivated) then put in your sim and anything that has been saved to the phone instead of the sim will appear. If you do not have a sim card of your own take the phone into the service provider (rogers, wireless wave, fido, bell mobility etc) and let them put in a sim from one of their courtesy phones. If all else fails, you could put an ad in your local paper. I really feel bad for the person who lost it as my cell cost $720 so I know they would appreciate getting it back if it's a high end phone.
Answers:
just get a new sim card and ifs fully functional...the phone must be able to support the network though.
Actually, you need to go a step further. The owner may have canceled the service but you can indeed call the numbers on the phone. It's called a land line. You do not have to call from the cell phone. Just turn on and open address book to find the numbers and call from your house. It is the least you can do before claiming it as your own. If you honestly go though all the numbers and sincerely search those numbers for the owner and get no results then I would say it is your.
You always do what is best so that you can live in your own skin.
Try to find the owner first. Check for saved numbers such as 'Home' , 'mom', etc. If you cannot access anything (in the event the phone has a sim card that has been deactivated) then put in your sim and anything that has been saved to the phone instead of the sim will appear. If you do not have a sim card of your own take the phone into the service provider (rogers, wireless wave, fido, bell mobility etc) and let them put in a sim from one of their courtesy phones. If all else fails, you could put an ad in your local paper. I really feel bad for the person who lost it as my cell cost $720 so I know they would appreciate getting it back if it's a high end phone.
Getting Secret Security Clearance, but not Top Secret?
I am pursing a career with the Governement, and I am sure I will get Secret Security Clearance. But how important is it to get Top Secret. I am afraid that for whatever unknown reason they just decide to deny me. Obviously have nothing to hide. But I have lived in several countries. Should I worry about getting Top. Can you go far with just secret? Because I don't want to pursue a career where, there my be a dead end.
Answers:
They only investigate and approve you for the level of clearance that you need to perform your job. If your job requires a secret clearance, then that's what they process. If you later get a job that requires a top secret, they go through the same process to upgrade the clearance.
You have to have a job that requires a TS for the paper work to go in. It's the countries you lived in, not that you lived abroad that matters.
Answers:
They only investigate and approve you for the level of clearance that you need to perform your job. If your job requires a secret clearance, then that's what they process. If you later get a job that requires a top secret, they go through the same process to upgrade the clearance.
You have to have a job that requires a TS for the paper work to go in. It's the countries you lived in, not that you lived abroad that matters.
Getting Secret Security Clearance, but not Top Secret?
I am pursing a career with the Governement, and I am sure I will get Secret Security Clearance. But how important is it to get Top Secret. I am afraid that for whatever unknown reason they just decide to deny me. Obviously have nothing to hide. But I have lived in several countries. Should I worry about getting Top. Can you go far with just secret? Because I don't want to pursue a career where, there my be a dead end.
What happens if I have been working for the Gov. with Secret clearance. But, then need to get top, and get denied? Will my career be over?
Answers:
Your level of clearance depends on what you need to know to get your job done. If you need to nothing above confidential, then you don't get a secret clearance.
The branch of government, the levels of clearance of those with whom you work... nothing like that makes any difference.
If you are in an environment that requires a certain level of security. that is, if in the execution of your duties you come in contact with sensitive information, you may be required to get that level of security, or you may be disallowed access to certain areas of the place in which you work. And even if you have a TS clearance, if there is confidential information you dont need for your job, you will not ge given access to it.
If you need an upgrade to get a promotion, that clearance check will be made.
Security clearances cost money. There's a lot of legwork and investigation that goes on. For that reason, security investigations are kept to the minimum required.
It depends, did accepting the job depend upon your getting a TS.
Yours asking for a iron clad statement, I think the answer is no but who can tell.
I think I would ask whomever is hiring what they think and the answer may still be incorrect. It could be years before the problem shows up if there is a problem. Maybe you need a SCI clearance and flunk the lie detector test any number of things could happen.
Just keep your nose clean
What happens if I have been working for the Gov. with Secret clearance. But, then need to get top, and get denied? Will my career be over?
Answers:
Your level of clearance depends on what you need to know to get your job done. If you need to nothing above confidential, then you don't get a secret clearance.
The branch of government, the levels of clearance of those with whom you work... nothing like that makes any difference.
If you are in an environment that requires a certain level of security. that is, if in the execution of your duties you come in contact with sensitive information, you may be required to get that level of security, or you may be disallowed access to certain areas of the place in which you work. And even if you have a TS clearance, if there is confidential information you dont need for your job, you will not ge given access to it.
If you need an upgrade to get a promotion, that clearance check will be made.
Security clearances cost money. There's a lot of legwork and investigation that goes on. For that reason, security investigations are kept to the minimum required.
It depends, did accepting the job depend upon your getting a TS.
Yours asking for a iron clad statement, I think the answer is no but who can tell.
I think I would ask whomever is hiring what they think and the answer may still be incorrect. It could be years before the problem shows up if there is a problem. Maybe you need a SCI clearance and flunk the lie detector test any number of things could happen.
Just keep your nose clean
Getting out of tenency agreements?
my friends mum has just let a property. she was told it would be ready by last monday and would be paying rent from that date. they moved all the furniture etc from over two hundred miles away to find the house unfinished. there are live wires hanging out the walls, a gas fire that doesnt work and isnt capped off, electric sockets dont work, kitchen floor isnt covered, rent was agreed at 90 a wk, then told two days later the landlord wants 100 instead. rubbish all over the house, and a gas boiler that isnt up to standard, a security light thats on all the time that you cant turn off. can my friends mum get out of the tenancy as the landlord hasnt given a gas safety check either. he's broken the contract before the week is out. the house isnt safe to live in and she's expected to pay rent for a house she cant live in.
Answers:
If a contract has been signed the landlord is in breach - therefore your friend's mother has every right to pull out without paying a penny.
In order to increase a rent, the landlord would have needed to give at least one months notice.
Any problems with the landlord, your friend's mother should start off by consulting a solicitor then the local council - I am not sure if the council can help, but you never know.
well i wouldnt be paying rent and id certainly squeeze his little blessings until the work was done to standard and no extra rent would be paid under any circumstances
Yes of course she can.
Has she given any money over yet, deposit?
If not, then get her to look for another place to live, there's nothing that the landlord can do %26 he he threatens court action, well the judge i would imagine would look favourably on your friends Mum, after all he's the one that has broken the contract.
This guy sounds like a real idiot %26 someone ought to report him.
Hi you may wish to browse www.landlordexpert.co.uk very interesting and will help you as it did me! or citizens advise are very clued up.
Good luck
In order to answer the question in full I would need to see the agreement...but in general...the flat would need to be of fit purpose in order for the agreement to start...if that's not the case then your mother has no contract...as the flat was not fit for purpose.
If the house is "unlivable", then it is OK for your friend's mom to not pay rent until the house is "livable". Each state has its own definition of "livable". There are exposed live wires and electric outlets don't work. There is no kitchen floor. And the gas boiler is not up to code (make sure it's not "up to code" and that it can't be "grandfathered in" -- which means, if the house is not brand-new, just built, they can keep the old boiler and don't have to replace it.)
I would consider the exposed live wires and inability to use electricity due to the non-working outlets "unlivable"...If she signed a contract for $90 a week and the contract did not allow for an increase in rent during the term of the contract, then they cannot raise the rent to $100. If your friend's mom didn't sign a contract, she is out of luck on the cost of rent. Anything that isn't in writing can't be proven.
If your friend's mom does move to another place, make sure she actually sees pictures of the house inside and out and has a written guarantee that the house will have central heat, air conditioning, and any appliances she doesn't want to purchase herself, like a stove with oven, refrigerator, microwave/range hood, dishwasher and garbage disposal. Some places include the cost of water in the rent, some also include cable/Internet access. Make sure that anything your friend's mom doesn't want to provide herself is listed in the contract.
Everything must be in writing. If the move-in date was on the contract, then your friend's mom doesn't have to pay rent until the house is "livable"/safe.
If I were your friend's mom, I'd move into a hotel until the house is ready and give the homeowner the bill, because your friend's mom was guaranteed a place to live and that it would be ready by a certain date. They broke the contract by not being ready. Your friend's mom can either back out of the contract and sue the homeowners for hotel time until she can find another home, or she can start renting the house once it is ready and the contract is signed and then present the bill for the hotel. It's not your friend's mom's fault that the house wasn't ready. As long as things were in writing, your friend's mom is safe. If nothing was specifically included in the lease about the price, she's going to have to pay the $100 a week or find another place to live.
If property was mean't to be ready from a date and mum was not informed that it was not ready.and the property is unsafe to be living in eg wires ...landlord in breach of his contract. Mum should also be considering charging/suing landlord for related exspences caused by the breach(where is she staying?...what about furniture storage?). He cannot increase rent without a rent increase clause in tenancy agreement and without following certain statutory procedures. Your mum should approach the local authority for further help.or citizens advice bureau. But if i were her i would be considering the future with this landlord as in if he has let her sone before she is even in the property what does the future with him hold??
Yes, she can. She needs to contact the landlord with a list of complaints. He has broken his side of the contract - she needs to put it in writing and tell him that he has 14 days to do the jobs required or she will be taking matters further. He has also broken the agreement over the rent. Officer of fair trading at the local authority will intervene as i recall. We had a similar problem last year and it put the wind up the landlady so much she gave us notice to quit!
Go to www.shelter.org for further advice- it is very helpful- and not just for the homeless either.
Answers:
If a contract has been signed the landlord is in breach - therefore your friend's mother has every right to pull out without paying a penny.
In order to increase a rent, the landlord would have needed to give at least one months notice.
Any problems with the landlord, your friend's mother should start off by consulting a solicitor then the local council - I am not sure if the council can help, but you never know.
well i wouldnt be paying rent and id certainly squeeze his little blessings until the work was done to standard and no extra rent would be paid under any circumstances
Yes of course she can.
Has she given any money over yet, deposit?
If not, then get her to look for another place to live, there's nothing that the landlord can do %26 he he threatens court action, well the judge i would imagine would look favourably on your friends Mum, after all he's the one that has broken the contract.
This guy sounds like a real idiot %26 someone ought to report him.
Hi you may wish to browse www.landlordexpert.co.uk very interesting and will help you as it did me! or citizens advise are very clued up.
Good luck
In order to answer the question in full I would need to see the agreement...but in general...the flat would need to be of fit purpose in order for the agreement to start...if that's not the case then your mother has no contract...as the flat was not fit for purpose.
If the house is "unlivable", then it is OK for your friend's mom to not pay rent until the house is "livable". Each state has its own definition of "livable". There are exposed live wires and electric outlets don't work. There is no kitchen floor. And the gas boiler is not up to code (make sure it's not "up to code" and that it can't be "grandfathered in" -- which means, if the house is not brand-new, just built, they can keep the old boiler and don't have to replace it.)
I would consider the exposed live wires and inability to use electricity due to the non-working outlets "unlivable"...If she signed a contract for $90 a week and the contract did not allow for an increase in rent during the term of the contract, then they cannot raise the rent to $100. If your friend's mom didn't sign a contract, she is out of luck on the cost of rent. Anything that isn't in writing can't be proven.
If your friend's mom does move to another place, make sure she actually sees pictures of the house inside and out and has a written guarantee that the house will have central heat, air conditioning, and any appliances she doesn't want to purchase herself, like a stove with oven, refrigerator, microwave/range hood, dishwasher and garbage disposal. Some places include the cost of water in the rent, some also include cable/Internet access. Make sure that anything your friend's mom doesn't want to provide herself is listed in the contract.
Everything must be in writing. If the move-in date was on the contract, then your friend's mom doesn't have to pay rent until the house is "livable"/safe.
If I were your friend's mom, I'd move into a hotel until the house is ready and give the homeowner the bill, because your friend's mom was guaranteed a place to live and that it would be ready by a certain date. They broke the contract by not being ready. Your friend's mom can either back out of the contract and sue the homeowners for hotel time until she can find another home, or she can start renting the house once it is ready and the contract is signed and then present the bill for the hotel. It's not your friend's mom's fault that the house wasn't ready. As long as things were in writing, your friend's mom is safe. If nothing was specifically included in the lease about the price, she's going to have to pay the $100 a week or find another place to live.
If property was mean't to be ready from a date and mum was not informed that it was not ready.and the property is unsafe to be living in eg wires ...landlord in breach of his contract. Mum should also be considering charging/suing landlord for related exspences caused by the breach(where is she staying?...what about furniture storage?). He cannot increase rent without a rent increase clause in tenancy agreement and without following certain statutory procedures. Your mum should approach the local authority for further help.or citizens advice bureau. But if i were her i would be considering the future with this landlord as in if he has let her sone before she is even in the property what does the future with him hold??
Yes, she can. She needs to contact the landlord with a list of complaints. He has broken his side of the contract - she needs to put it in writing and tell him that he has 14 days to do the jobs required or she will be taking matters further. He has also broken the agreement over the rent. Officer of fair trading at the local authority will intervene as i recall. We had a similar problem last year and it put the wind up the landlady so much she gave us notice to quit!
Go to www.shelter.org for further advice- it is very helpful- and not just for the homeless either.
Getting married to someone in a different country?
has anyone ever heard of getting paid $25 grand to get married to someone in a different country just so they can get citizenship? and can i do it more then once a year?
Answers:
This is an illegal practice and it can get you in trouble with the law.
Committing even one case of marriage fraud is a serious crime, punishable by prison. It hardly seems worth it in the end. After all, freedom is pretty important; it's the very thing that usually motivates foreigners to commit this type of fraud in the fist place: Coming to the Land of the Free. But as they say, freedom is never free, is it?
yeah I know one person who did that. I would not recommend it though. The INS people will give you an intense interview that most happily married couples could not pass. Then even if you pass that they will make surprise interviews at your house. Last the process is at least 3 or 4 years so no way could you do it once a year, I doubt you could do it two times ever because they will ask you about what happened to your last wife.
Sell drugs, become a pimp, rob a bank, all are easier than trying to make money marrying people for visas.
The feds have strict rules.. the green card is conditional unless the marriage lasts 3 years. The interview is extensive, etc.
Answers:
This is an illegal practice and it can get you in trouble with the law.
Committing even one case of marriage fraud is a serious crime, punishable by prison. It hardly seems worth it in the end. After all, freedom is pretty important; it's the very thing that usually motivates foreigners to commit this type of fraud in the fist place: Coming to the Land of the Free. But as they say, freedom is never free, is it?
yeah I know one person who did that. I would not recommend it though. The INS people will give you an intense interview that most happily married couples could not pass. Then even if you pass that they will make surprise interviews at your house. Last the process is at least 3 or 4 years so no way could you do it once a year, I doubt you could do it two times ever because they will ask you about what happened to your last wife.
Sell drugs, become a pimp, rob a bank, all are easier than trying to make money marrying people for visas.
The feds have strict rules.. the green card is conditional unless the marriage lasts 3 years. The interview is extensive, etc.
Getting child support from a rich ex...?
My ex makes a 6 figure salary a year but wont pay the child support that is due to his kids. Its tricky here's why...
His base pay is approximately 50-55,000 a year, however, he makes bonus and commissions each month which equals out the rest of his salary. I only get child support directly taken out of his paycheck out of the 50,000. Its up to him to pay me the 28% from his bonus and commssions money - and of course he doesnt which means taking him to court every year! The state of Illinois says since his bonus and commissions are different each time that they cant take a fixed amount out. Right now he owes me 10,500 from 2006 and 10,000 for 2007 already.
How can I get the money that my kids deserve without all of this stress and court each year?
Can my ex's employer be told to take out a certain % since the state of Illinois will only take out of his base pay?
Any advice, suggestion or opinions would be appreciated! If I dont fight for my kids who else will?
Answers:
I think it will be difficult to get an accurate answer, even from an attorney in your area. Judges have the power to deviate from law when it fits the situation to make life "fair" for everyone.
In Virginia, my husband is required to take our tax returns from the past two years. He works a lot of overtime some years and hardly any on others, so the judge averages the past two years to avoid seeing us every year. Perhaps you can get your attorney or Child Support Services in your area to make that happen.
Good luck and remember that the children see what is happening. Let them form their own opinions about your deadbeat ex.
The only competent answer you will get is one from a member of the Illinois Bar.
talk to child support because I do not give a poo what you can and can not get to tell you the truth. get a job and share the parenting.
The only place you'll get a right answer is from the Child Support Division of your states Attorney General office.
i work 4 the csa
good luck the place is upside down even the gov
said the csa is not working
good luck
His base pay is approximately 50-55,000 a year, however, he makes bonus and commissions each month which equals out the rest of his salary. I only get child support directly taken out of his paycheck out of the 50,000. Its up to him to pay me the 28% from his bonus and commssions money - and of course he doesnt which means taking him to court every year! The state of Illinois says since his bonus and commissions are different each time that they cant take a fixed amount out. Right now he owes me 10,500 from 2006 and 10,000 for 2007 already.
How can I get the money that my kids deserve without all of this stress and court each year?
Can my ex's employer be told to take out a certain % since the state of Illinois will only take out of his base pay?
Any advice, suggestion or opinions would be appreciated! If I dont fight for my kids who else will?
Answers:
I think it will be difficult to get an accurate answer, even from an attorney in your area. Judges have the power to deviate from law when it fits the situation to make life "fair" for everyone.
In Virginia, my husband is required to take our tax returns from the past two years. He works a lot of overtime some years and hardly any on others, so the judge averages the past two years to avoid seeing us every year. Perhaps you can get your attorney or Child Support Services in your area to make that happen.
Good luck and remember that the children see what is happening. Let them form their own opinions about your deadbeat ex.
The only competent answer you will get is one from a member of the Illinois Bar.
talk to child support because I do not give a poo what you can and can not get to tell you the truth. get a job and share the parenting.
The only place you'll get a right answer is from the Child Support Division of your states Attorney General office.
i work 4 the csa
good luck the place is upside down even the gov
said the csa is not working
good luck
Getting a real estate license wih a felony...?
I have a domestic violence felony that's on my record from 4 or 5 years ago and want to know if i can get my CA real estate license? I finished all of my "anger management" classes which was very interesting and i'm done with my probation. I don't have anything else on my record. I've heard it's a 50/50 chance just be honest with them. I'm set to take my real estate exam this month and wanted to know. It was an unfortunate situatuion tha happened in my past and I've learned from it. I do know now that if a women is pushing your buttons by keying your car, breaking your car windows, and being over agressive towards you, it's not ok to slap a women. Please let me know about the license thanks.
Answers:
Write to your states real estate licensing department and tell the truth.
It will make it harder because it is a felony of moral turpitude. I do not think you can here in Texas, but every state is different. I have the same problem, but my felony was possession of meth, which does not close as many doors, but it does some
In California, the answer is NO. You can try to appeal the licensing board. However, your chances are VERY slim, at best. Honesty is the best policy. You can indeed appeal. But, have a back up plan.
Answers:
Write to your states real estate licensing department and tell the truth.
It will make it harder because it is a felony of moral turpitude. I do not think you can here in Texas, but every state is different. I have the same problem, but my felony was possession of meth, which does not close as many doors, but it does some
In California, the answer is NO. You can try to appeal the licensing board. However, your chances are VERY slim, at best. Honesty is the best policy. You can indeed appeal. But, have a back up plan.
Getting a prescription drug from Canada?
I would like to get Diclectin for morning sickness. It is a Class A medication, the safest one out there. However, it is made in Canada. Can my doctor write a prescription for a Canadian drug so I can purchase it online? Which begs another question, does anyone know a reputable Canadian online pharmacy. Thanks!
Answers:
As long as you have a valid prescription issued by a medical doctor, licensed to practice medicine in the United States, you can order your medications from Canadian pharmacies. However, I regret that I don't know which ones are reputable or have the best service. Good luck in finding one.
Viva Christo Rey!
I just got an email for a Canadian online pharmacy. I need some muscle relaxers because I am in alot of pain and my doctor will not listen to me! So I have to suffer through this alone until I can see a specialist. I was wondering if it is legal to order that kind of drug over the Internet. I hope you get some good answers. If I can find what website sent me the email, I'll add it to this.
Answers:
As long as you have a valid prescription issued by a medical doctor, licensed to practice medicine in the United States, you can order your medications from Canadian pharmacies. However, I regret that I don't know which ones are reputable or have the best service. Good luck in finding one.
Viva Christo Rey!
I just got an email for a Canadian online pharmacy. I need some muscle relaxers because I am in alot of pain and my doctor will not listen to me! So I have to suffer through this alone until I can see a specialist. I was wondering if it is legal to order that kind of drug over the Internet. I hope you get some good answers. If I can find what website sent me the email, I'll add it to this.
Getting a chat users personal or ip address from yahoo?
How can you get a users ip address, please note user has been a stalker and harrassing me but also my children %26 business.
Answers:
Yahoo won't release anyone's IP address except by order of a court. If you really want to, you can ask a judge for a restraining order, and if he grants it then yahoo will have to comply. But it's not likely.
Why can't you just block and report the user?
Yahoo isn't going to reveal users' IPs. How has he been harassing your children and business? Did you tell them your children's names? What do you mean by business? Job or just what you do in general. Most jobs will not let you browse the Internet, especially this site for personal reasons.
If he's threatening you in real life by calling your house and business, call the police. They will call him and tell him to stop. If he continues, call them back. And log everytime he calls, what time he calls, then hang up.
You may have to pay to get his number blocked.
there is a way to get the ip.lol.get the dude on cam ...then in start menu.do run...then type command...it will bring up a black box ...in that black box type .netstat(space)-n .that will bring a bunch of ips...look for one with :5101 behind it ...usually works
Answers:
Yahoo won't release anyone's IP address except by order of a court. If you really want to, you can ask a judge for a restraining order, and if he grants it then yahoo will have to comply. But it's not likely.
Why can't you just block and report the user?
Yahoo isn't going to reveal users' IPs. How has he been harassing your children and business? Did you tell them your children's names? What do you mean by business? Job or just what you do in general. Most jobs will not let you browse the Internet, especially this site for personal reasons.
If he's threatening you in real life by calling your house and business, call the police. They will call him and tell him to stop. If he continues, call them back. And log everytime he calls, what time he calls, then hang up.
You may have to pay to get his number blocked.
there is a way to get the ip.lol.get the dude on cam ...then in start menu.do run...then type command...it will bring up a black box ...in that black box type .netstat(space)-n .that will bring a bunch of ips...look for one with :5101 behind it ...usually works
Gettin ur lisence in michigan?
Im 18 and Ive taken drivers training both segment 1 and 2 and Ive got all my driving hours in that I need and I have taken and passed the writen test all I need to do now is go and take the road test for my lisence but I was wondering if there is like maybe a certain age like 21 were u can go get ur lisence with out even taken the road test? cuz I really just want to go up and get it rather than taken the road test.
Please only answer this question if u kno the rules in Michigan I know its different in different states.
Answers:
I think you must be better at spelling.
Call the secretary of state office near you and ask them they are the only ones that would really know. I only had to take the driving test once when I was 15 I passed and thats the last time I ever had to take a driving test I am 29 now.
Really if you are just renewing your license you wouldn't need to take the test again but if you move out and come back like I did maybe you would have to take the written test again not the driving test.
You are 18, do the research yourself. www.michigan.gov/sos
Please only answer this question if u kno the rules in Michigan I know its different in different states.
Answers:
I think you must be better at spelling.
Call the secretary of state office near you and ask them they are the only ones that would really know. I only had to take the driving test once when I was 15 I passed and thats the last time I ever had to take a driving test I am 29 now.
Really if you are just renewing your license you wouldn't need to take the test again but if you move out and come back like I did maybe you would have to take the written test again not the driving test.
You are 18, do the research yourself. www.michigan.gov/sos
Gery Coleman.?
Was charged with Disorderly Conduct in Utah after geting mad at a fan herassing him.The charges should be reversed, Don't you agree?
Answers:
Haven't read the item but if he was being harassed what was he supposed to do ?
What you talking about Willis?
(couldn't help myself)
being famous isnt all its cracked up to be.
The charges should be reversed and gary colemen should charge the fan with disorderly conduct!!
Just for that im canceling my vacation to Utah!
Answers:
Haven't read the item but if he was being harassed what was he supposed to do ?
What you talking about Willis?
(couldn't help myself)
being famous isnt all its cracked up to be.
The charges should be reversed and gary colemen should charge the fan with disorderly conduct!!
Just for that im canceling my vacation to Utah!
Gentlemen - whats the procedure?
pulled into the garage and turned off my engine, unlocked my door and it opened by itself.
standing there with a clenched fist and bearing over the arch of the door was a white haired old guy who went on to tell me that i had cut across him at a roundabout (yes, but with enough space for a 40 ft truck) and how he was an off duty policeman (sure) and had relatives in the police, (of course) there was also some physical threat - this boggled me - as im sure you know such a situation would normally warrant beating the perpetrator to submission, however in this case it was an older ...gentleman.
i need to know whether to offer a severe beating to such an individual in future ... id say mid to late 50s.
Answers:
No. What you do is get his license number, go to the local police, and report that you were threatened by someone claiming to be a police officer. They'll run the plates and go from there. Since the guy jerked open your door, the guy's prints would prove he had been there.
Police officers get very cranky with posers.
haha he just fancied you that's all. ignore it unless you want some old dude action
Then he could really have you arrested. Best ignore.
I'd suggest offering an apology for cutting him off, and a firm warning that speaking to you in such a manner again will jeopardize his health. If he doesn't turn around and walk away immediately, offer a small sample of said jeopardy.
I'd have just punched his fu*king lights out. Only of course, once you'd left the CCTV confines of the garage. Cut him up at the next roundabout, smash his skull like an eggshell, punch his kidneys and plunge your thumbs into each eye socket, then drive off. In his car.
A threat of immediate physical harm accompanied by some physical act that would indicate you actually intend to carry out that act would be considered assault in most states. If I were you I would keep my cool and leave out the threats.
i think a beating would be to much.. maybe a f*ck off and go away approach
Just humour the ignorant,
Bet he likes going into empty smoke free pubs
I'm surprised you even have to ask us.
Just say sorry and invite him to use your shower and washing machine.
If it really bothers you, other him the use of your wife and children.
Who knows, he may be a better husband.
?
just say sorry mate, if he doesn't go tell him you said you were sorry now piss off, if he comes towards you just push him away and say you don't want to fight him and tell him again to piss off and just walk into your house and forget about him.
In my eyes he deserves a good kick in but he could have a heart attach or something meaning you could kill the guy and go down for manslaughter, is a bit of road range really worth that, i think not
What this "gentleman" did was harassment, and the fact that he opened your car door, it's assault. it's illegal and could land his butt in jail, next time, take note of his licence plate and report it. People get cut off all the time, how they deal with it is something else.
You'd be better advised to grow up and learn how to drive with more consideration for other road users.
This guy broke into your house and was threatening you, to me that is enough to kill the guy. I have guns and knives in my house, i would easily pull one out tell him to get the F*** out or i will blow your brains out. since he was old though a sufficient beating should be fine. the important thing though is to make sure you get a message across, whatever method possible.
If this garage is a private attachment to your residence, you beat him within an inch of his life, then call the authorities...he's an intruder. If it's a public garage.oh hell, I'd thump him anyway! Just remember to move your car after-wards.
I have that oft heard screech from the pub ringing in my head...
"Noooo Wayne! Stop it! Eees not wurf it!"
Just say... I say old chap, I'd rather you were a bit more polite on the road
It'll work wonders
Tempting as it would be to punch him- as a gentleman I would strongly advise a more polite approach.
Insult him with a tirade of patronising abuse, that makes yourself sound intelligent whilst belittling him and humiliating him in public...I always find calling someone a "little man" helps. When he feels about an inch tall and embarrassed that someone half his age or so has outwitted him, then I'd tell him to f**k off and carry on with your business.
If, as expected, he would continue to shout abuse at you, just turn to him and say "I'm sorry sir, I've said all I had to say. Good day sir", and turn away again.
Following this, the silent treatment should suffice, until you are safely in your car. Whilst driving away you can choose one of a number of hand gestures (my preference the w**king gesture) in order to infuriate him as well as having belittled and humiliated him.
Hopefully that shound do the trick- even if you haven't cleared your name for driving, you will have p**sed him off and made yourself feel happier that you had done!
Just a suggestion.
what Wee Ste said
standing there with a clenched fist and bearing over the arch of the door was a white haired old guy who went on to tell me that i had cut across him at a roundabout (yes, but with enough space for a 40 ft truck) and how he was an off duty policeman (sure) and had relatives in the police, (of course) there was also some physical threat - this boggled me - as im sure you know such a situation would normally warrant beating the perpetrator to submission, however in this case it was an older ...gentleman.
i need to know whether to offer a severe beating to such an individual in future ... id say mid to late 50s.
Answers:
No. What you do is get his license number, go to the local police, and report that you were threatened by someone claiming to be a police officer. They'll run the plates and go from there. Since the guy jerked open your door, the guy's prints would prove he had been there.
Police officers get very cranky with posers.
haha he just fancied you that's all. ignore it unless you want some old dude action
Then he could really have you arrested. Best ignore.
I'd suggest offering an apology for cutting him off, and a firm warning that speaking to you in such a manner again will jeopardize his health. If he doesn't turn around and walk away immediately, offer a small sample of said jeopardy.
I'd have just punched his fu*king lights out. Only of course, once you'd left the CCTV confines of the garage. Cut him up at the next roundabout, smash his skull like an eggshell, punch his kidneys and plunge your thumbs into each eye socket, then drive off. In his car.
A threat of immediate physical harm accompanied by some physical act that would indicate you actually intend to carry out that act would be considered assault in most states. If I were you I would keep my cool and leave out the threats.
i think a beating would be to much.. maybe a f*ck off and go away approach
Just humour the ignorant,
Bet he likes going into empty smoke free pubs
I'm surprised you even have to ask us.
Just say sorry and invite him to use your shower and washing machine.
If it really bothers you, other him the use of your wife and children.
Who knows, he may be a better husband.
?
just say sorry mate, if he doesn't go tell him you said you were sorry now piss off, if he comes towards you just push him away and say you don't want to fight him and tell him again to piss off and just walk into your house and forget about him.
In my eyes he deserves a good kick in but he could have a heart attach or something meaning you could kill the guy and go down for manslaughter, is a bit of road range really worth that, i think not
What this "gentleman" did was harassment, and the fact that he opened your car door, it's assault. it's illegal and could land his butt in jail, next time, take note of his licence plate and report it. People get cut off all the time, how they deal with it is something else.
You'd be better advised to grow up and learn how to drive with more consideration for other road users.
This guy broke into your house and was threatening you, to me that is enough to kill the guy. I have guns and knives in my house, i would easily pull one out tell him to get the F*** out or i will blow your brains out. since he was old though a sufficient beating should be fine. the important thing though is to make sure you get a message across, whatever method possible.
If this garage is a private attachment to your residence, you beat him within an inch of his life, then call the authorities...he's an intruder. If it's a public garage.oh hell, I'd thump him anyway! Just remember to move your car after-wards.
I have that oft heard screech from the pub ringing in my head...
"Noooo Wayne! Stop it! Eees not wurf it!"
Just say... I say old chap, I'd rather you were a bit more polite on the road
It'll work wonders
Tempting as it would be to punch him- as a gentleman I would strongly advise a more polite approach.
Insult him with a tirade of patronising abuse, that makes yourself sound intelligent whilst belittling him and humiliating him in public...I always find calling someone a "little man" helps. When he feels about an inch tall and embarrassed that someone half his age or so has outwitted him, then I'd tell him to f**k off and carry on with your business.
If, as expected, he would continue to shout abuse at you, just turn to him and say "I'm sorry sir, I've said all I had to say. Good day sir", and turn away again.
Following this, the silent treatment should suffice, until you are safely in your car. Whilst driving away you can choose one of a number of hand gestures (my preference the w**king gesture) in order to infuriate him as well as having belittled and humiliated him.
Hopefully that shound do the trick- even if you haven't cleared your name for driving, you will have p**sed him off and made yourself feel happier that you had done!
Just a suggestion.
what Wee Ste said
General Warns of Terroist Cells In US?
Answers:
Frankly who cares. The administration has had 6 years now almost to solve this problem and from what I see absolutely nothing has been done to solve anything. After this much time the fault if something happens will fall upon those in charge and those who put them in charge. If you knew for 6 years that someone was out to get you, you should have stopped them by now.
Yeah, pretty much anybody can get through the borders. This isn't a surprise.
Yep -- for about 20 years now.
Yes. Muslims have been building their strength in the US and several cells have already been caught.
YAWN. What is the real level of threat? What can I do about it? Will they really defeat the entire US military? What is their immediate target? Blah,blah, yada,yada, yada.
Isn't this old and boring yet?
No target, no immediate threat, non-actionable data. Why say it? To scare the crap out of you? I'm not playing that game now. Didin play it before, Ain't gonna play it if they do manage to kill themselves.
Just wanted to say good job Speakeasy.
Yes they'll try and try and we'll get more and more fed up and even the libs will want to enlist eventually.
GE Moneybank?
We have an account with GE money. I guess if you pay late twice in 6 months you are removed from whatever program you were on. We had no interest until 2009. Anyway they tacked on the interest. We had our account paid down to $1000. They added $1600 interest to it. The account had a limit of $2000. Now we are over our limit by $600. I just got our last statement and they are now charging us a $30 per month over limit fee! It was their interest that put us over. Not purchases. Is that even legal!?!
Please note that we are not crap bags that don't pay our bills. My husband works off commision and we always pay our bills. Sometimes a few days late but NEVER 30 days.
Answers:
One of the biggest scams today, they own you and unless you can pay them off, you are screwed. Get a signature loan at a bank and pay that off, then never go back again.
Happened to me too. I financed $3000 for Lase eye surgery. Paid it down to $1800 when I was late the second time by one day. They added the deferred interst of $700. They aso raised the interest rate to 28%.,
I transferred the balance to another credit card. F them.
Please note that we are not crap bags that don't pay our bills. My husband works off commision and we always pay our bills. Sometimes a few days late but NEVER 30 days.
Answers:
One of the biggest scams today, they own you and unless you can pay them off, you are screwed. Get a signature loan at a bank and pay that off, then never go back again.
Happened to me too. I financed $3000 for Lase eye surgery. Paid it down to $1800 when I was late the second time by one day. They added the deferred interst of $700. They aso raised the interest rate to 28%.,
I transferred the balance to another credit card. F them.
Gay Police?
Are there gay men in the police department and if so are they out or do they stay in the closet.
Answers:
Most cities have an association for gay officers. There are strong contingents in the obvious locations - San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles.
There are certainly out officers in many areas of the country.
depends on the individual, I really do not know..
There would be a lot more 20 year old males with legitimate stories about being pulled over and patted down for no reason. spread em boy
there are Gay's everywhere my friend
well in the UK there are a few gay police men and no one really cares, we even have 1 gay chief constable, (that would be like head of state police in america. They are even allowed to have a gay police march in their uniforms, which i find a bit untasteful, . we have a gay police federation and a black police federation which i also find untasful and patronising. as far as i am concerned a policeman is a policeman regardless of their skin colour or sexual orientation
Not a clue. And I confess that I don't care as long as they're good police officers.
There are gays everywhere and in every kind of job.
As far as how they come out or not, I would think that particularly in the alpha-male-dominated, chest-thumping kind of environment that police typically have, that there are a lot of gay men and lesbians who stay in the closet to avoid conflict. I'm sure there are also plenty of gays in the police force who are completely open about their orientation.
Answers:
Most cities have an association for gay officers. There are strong contingents in the obvious locations - San Francisco, New York, and Los Angeles.
There are certainly out officers in many areas of the country.
depends on the individual, I really do not know..
There would be a lot more 20 year old males with legitimate stories about being pulled over and patted down for no reason. spread em boy
there are Gay's everywhere my friend
well in the UK there are a few gay police men and no one really cares, we even have 1 gay chief constable, (that would be like head of state police in america. They are even allowed to have a gay police march in their uniforms, which i find a bit untasteful, . we have a gay police federation and a black police federation which i also find untasful and patronising. as far as i am concerned a policeman is a policeman regardless of their skin colour or sexual orientation
Not a clue. And I confess that I don't care as long as they're good police officers.
There are gays everywhere and in every kind of job.
As far as how they come out or not, I would think that particularly in the alpha-male-dominated, chest-thumping kind of environment that police typically have, that there are a lot of gay men and lesbians who stay in the closet to avoid conflict. I'm sure there are also plenty of gays in the police force who are completely open about their orientation.
Gay Marriage...Is this really the land of the free?
Answers:
If two committed people want to live together as a family and agree to share their property and assets equally, there's no reason it should not be recognized. Contrary to what conservatives think, gays don't want special treatment and they aren't asking the government to do anything for them. From a practical point of view, marriage is a just a contract like any other. And the law has no right to tell people who they can or cannot choose to sign a contract with. I side with the libertarian view that aside from recording the paperwork, the government should simply stay out of the business of marriage.
no
Ever been out of the country to see how they go about it elsewhere? The answer is "Yes!" Duh.
You're free to do anything that's not against the law...
Advocates of same-sex marriage try to make it sound as bourgeois as possible, but gay marriage is really the triumph of the most radical ideas of the sexual revolution: that gender doesn't matter, children are secondary, expressing your authentic sexual self is more important than, well, practically anything else. Choosing to gay has consequences. What is Ann Heche choosing these days?
in order to have a marriage there has to be a man and a woman that is just what a marriage is.
the gays are free to practice their lifestyle here in America so this is really the land of the free.
You can have all the wedding ceremonies you want. The government is just not going to issue a wedding certificate and change the definition of marriage for all citizens.
You aren't asking for freedom. You're asking the government to do something for you.
nah...free to cross state borders without papers, and free to pursue happiness, but not free to gay marriage...we also discourage marriage to little kids and animals, etc, etc. You are also not free to rob gas stations either...lol Go get'em penelope...she's sooo good!!
Compared to other countries, yes we are the land of the free. What does Iran do to their gays?
Just like blacks and women being able to vote, own land, and have basic equal rights, it will happen for Gays. Just not now. It takes time for a culture to accept something new, and give it a few more years and it will be accepted everywhere. Maybe not as a marriage, but as a civil union with all of the rights of being married.
All countries have to have rules and laws. If there were no marriage laws, one woman would be able to marry four men, her dog, and a couple of chickens.
One hundred percent free is impossible .,otherwise we would be free to murder, steal, rape, etc.
You have the same rights as I. The law says you can't marry another man - - - - neither can I. You don't have to have a reason, you just can't do it. Sorry.
helmet.G do they marry goat,s where you live ? DOWN HERE IN THE SOUTH US OLD RED NECK,S ,KINDA LIKE OUR WOMEN TO HAVE ONLY TWO HOOTER,S we are kinda into thing,s of that nature not men married to men or women to women. or mo listing children.
yes
Man+woman = a marriage.
Gay marriage, friend. That's nothing. In Canada, we are so addled by ice that we feel compelled to spend public moneys slated for education to accommodate what I now refer to as The Oppressive Minorities. Get this (from a square construction law website, http://www.bccondos.ca) under B.C. 'BILLY Dillies http://www.bccondos.ca/forums/viewtopic.
... Preparations are underway to overhaul up to 391 single-stall bathroom facilities on (UBC) campus in an effort to meet the access and diversity needs of the school's varied student body. Existing multi-stall men's and women's washrooms will remain. ... Upcoming changes range from the construction of new facilities, to replacing gender-specific signs on doors with gender-neutral ones. (Janet Mee, who, as UBC director of access and diversity, heads up the planned washroom renovations) Mee said no budget has yet been set for the project, and would not comment on possible costs.
Bathroom needs became an issue last year after members of the university's Pride association, representing gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgendered students, raised safety concerns with Mee's department. She said transgendered students have reported feeling harassed or embarrassed when forced to use traditionally segregated bathrooms on campus. The university has now come up with its own gender-neutral design for the one-stall washrooms. Yet to be formally unveiled, the new symbol -- a silhouette of a toilet -- will identify the facility, rather than the people who use it, Mee said..
... For Hesham Alsalman, with UBC's Muslim Student Association, it was the opportunity his group has long waited for. For years, practising muslims at UBC such as Alsalman have gathered in public washrooms at Brock Hall up to five times each day to carefully wash their hands, face and feet in preparation for daily prayers. It's a necessary ritual, symbolizing the cleansing of body and soul prior to prayer, said Alsalman. ... It's not uncommon for water to spill all over the floor -- an inconvenience for everyone using the interfaith facility. ... The university is now considering installing custom-constructed ablution facilities that would allow Muslim students to perform the bathing ritual in a safer, more convenient environment.
"It's a very small and minor requirement," said Alsalman of the proposed facilities, which would be included in both the men's and women's washrooms at Brock Hall used by the 600-plus association members for prayers.
In May, Simon Fraser University in Burnaby became the first university in B.C. to include ablution, or wudu, facilities for Muslim students on its campus. (From the Vancouver Sun Aug. 14/07)
What will be the public cost of this 'fair-minded' initiative, one wonders? There's no doubt a good reason Mee won't discuss it.
Why, one wonders, is there no mention here of the collision between Islam and other organized religions with the rights of women under Canada's Constitution? This is a decision involving the public purse. Should we spend public funds supporting in any way religions that oppress ONE WHOLE GENDER, for goodness sake? What happens when fundamental freedoms clash? Who sets priorities?
America is truly the land of the Free. History has shown that our approach to government and society is unique and effective. While your question is laced with political correctness and liberal slant, the fact is that even in a free society, any and all individual actions are not acceptable or tolerable. Just as drug use, assault, drunk driving, suicide and animal abuse could be construed to be 'rights' of an individual, looking at the impact to society and others must be addressed. These actions or activities do not strengthen the values and beliefs of a culture, they damage it.
Unions between same-sex partners is not a possitive direction for a society to go, as procreation, child rearing and fundamental replenishment of people are concerned.
Being a homosexual is not part of nature's plan to win, and though some are choosing to travel this path, government should not support that which will inevitably weaken the land as a whole.
BTW, you are still free to be a homosexual, just don't expect other citizen's to condone or pay for your choices.
It is only the land of the free, if you go along with the popular beliefs. I mean honestly who are we as human beings to tell on person that they can't get married. I mean people are like that make marriage a joke, no - look at the divorce rate of heterosexual couples, they are doing enough of a job making it a joke themselves. I don't understand why people think it's their place to judge what another one wants to do in their love life. So what if Bob wants to marry Joe. I mean really don't we have more important things to worry about. And then there are the people who are like that is a sin and goes against the bible. UM can I ask - WHO GIVES A SH*T! You people who say it is against the bible and blah blah blah, I recommend that you take the bible and shove up your righteous a*s. It is everyones right to seek "LIFE, LIBERTY, %26 the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS."
Gay marriage I challenge you to tell me how this harms my family?
OTTAWA (CBC) - Ontario's first openly gay cabinet minister is getting married this weekend
Health Minister George Smitherman, 43, is tying the knot with Christopher Peloso, 33, on Sunday at a picturesque resort in northern Ontario.
About 200 guests were expected to witness the lakeside ceremony outside a lodge near Sudbury, Ont.
The pair were quietly engaged on Christmas Day and Smitherman made the engagement public in February.
During last year's federal election campaign, the Liberal deputy premier talked about having a "shotgun wedding" if the federal Conservatives reversed the country's law allowing same-sex marriage.
A motion to reopen the same-sex marriage debate was easily defeated in Parliament on Dec. 7, 2006.
------------------------------...
I am a straight white married man rapidly becomeing a middle aged married man - My family has been in this country for almost 200 years - etc etc
All I want to know is how on earth te above news quote harms me and how
Answers:
It doesn't harm you or anyone else, despite the choleric rants of the God-botherers. If more prominent pols, vicars, actors, writers, role-model types of every kind, e.g., were to marry it might possibly shut the crazies down. It's hard to reason with these people...questions like, "Will your marriage erode?" and "Do you feel threatened personally?" leave them gasping in the dust...with nothing but 1 or 2 obscure NT references to hang onto. I'm in your category too and am mystified at the screaming fits.
It doesn't.
I don't understand why some people are so freaked out about 2 people getting married that they don't even know...
Who care...whatever floats their boat.
I don't see it fair that two people who are of the opposite sex get married and they get tax breaks and everything else (including a divorce after about 10 years)..BUT two people of the same sex get treated differently.
Who cares.if married people would worry about themselves instead of two gays getting married, maybe the divorce rate would lower.
I am very thankful that I live the in US for this very reason. Morals...that's what this behavior harms. When pastors in churches are unable to say that God is against such behavior unless they are willing to be jailed, my religious freedoms and beliefs are put into question and taken away from me. I would never want my children learning in school that this is a good and acceptable lifestyle. It is against God and against the union of a man and a woman as husband and wife. I will go to my deathbed believing this is an unacceptable lifestyle for families.
This should be allowed everywhere in the USA.
My son %26 has partner have outlasted 2 of my son's aunts marriages--the 2 women have divorced 6 TIMES in the time my son has been with his partner.
So who is more committed here?
Do you have children?
Does your child have a mommy and a daddy?
From a psychological point of view, it "clouds" the child's way of thinking. It shows them that little Jimmy has two daddies. When your child begins to learn about anatomy, all of that goes down the pisser!
It has no affect on your marriage. That some object because it violates their religious beliefs is their personal problem, IMO -- if you believe gay marriage is wrong, don't enter one. But that someone else doesn't believe it's wrong and gets married doesn't have anything to do with you.
It makes Pokemon show up.
This is totally disgusting, and morally wrong.
I'm a happily married man and my wife a happily married woman ... 26 years now.
Our relationship has grown and gotten stronger through some times that were good and some other times that were not so good.
A personal commitment to another person (and the children that have come) has made us better people.
I hope the commitment Minister Smitherman will make will make him and his partner better people.
I don't feel that such a relationship will harm me or my family.
While I read your question, another question occurred to me that is if something such as a gay marriage being so openly discussed as if it were no different than the news of a traditional man %26 woman wedding then what makes the sanctity of marriage so sacred?
You wonder how the news quote harms you? Well, directly it doesn't, but indirectly it may. If you are raising children and do not take the time to discuss the moral effects of such a news release with them, they will be led to believe that if it is ok in parliment then it must be ok with the world. Reality is its not. Without dragging religion into this its simple to say "whatever floats their boat, its their life-their choice," But when looking at it from God's point of view...there was a reason he created man and woman. I'm sure you would like your lineage to continue in your area since it has been there already for over 200 years. If you have a son that turns out to be gay and marries another man, what are the odds that your bloodline will continue? Its easy to say the name will go on, all he has to do is adopt a child. But your families lineage stops there.
Thats my take on the whole situation. I hope I met your challenge with some good points.
It doesn't. My mom and her partner are married in Vermont--and it hasn't harmed me or my wife.
It's just the religious nuts and the right who believe it harms traditional family values and marriages.
Oddly enough, we have a higher divorce rate with traditional marriages--than we do with gay marriages. People are more than likely to cheat in their "traditional" marriage than they are--if they were married to the same sex.
Abuse is more common in traditional marriages than they are in gay ones.
And here's the kicker: Washington state recently okayed civil unions for gays and lesbians. The day before, some local and outspoken Christian sects said that this was a "threat to traditional marriages and family values". (According to a Christian family group spokesman.)
The day that gays and lesbians could go to Olympia to certify their marriages, NOT ONE Christian Family Group (or likewise) came out to PROTEST the moment at the state's marriage license office.
So my question is this: If civil unions are such a THREAT to traditional marriage, why aren't these like-minded groups out there protesting whenever some gay or lesbian couple gets married out in public or recieve their licenses?
The answer is simple: They are cowards. They don't have a real leg to stand on. Everything is built on hypocrisy and fear.
Fear of the unknown, fear of change.
It doesn't. If people would just learn not to judge the life styles of others, then they would really be as close to understanding God, as they think they are! *sm*
I am a recently divorced heterosexual woman. I apploud you Honorable Health Minister. I wish you and your partner all the best in life.
Health Minister George Smitherman, 43, is tying the knot with Christopher Peloso, 33, on Sunday at a picturesque resort in northern Ontario.
About 200 guests were expected to witness the lakeside ceremony outside a lodge near Sudbury, Ont.
The pair were quietly engaged on Christmas Day and Smitherman made the engagement public in February.
During last year's federal election campaign, the Liberal deputy premier talked about having a "shotgun wedding" if the federal Conservatives reversed the country's law allowing same-sex marriage.
A motion to reopen the same-sex marriage debate was easily defeated in Parliament on Dec. 7, 2006.
------------------------------...
I am a straight white married man rapidly becomeing a middle aged married man - My family has been in this country for almost 200 years - etc etc
All I want to know is how on earth te above news quote harms me and how
Answers:
It doesn't harm you or anyone else, despite the choleric rants of the God-botherers. If more prominent pols, vicars, actors, writers, role-model types of every kind, e.g., were to marry it might possibly shut the crazies down. It's hard to reason with these people...questions like, "Will your marriage erode?" and "Do you feel threatened personally?" leave them gasping in the dust...with nothing but 1 or 2 obscure NT references to hang onto. I'm in your category too and am mystified at the screaming fits.
It doesn't.
I don't understand why some people are so freaked out about 2 people getting married that they don't even know...
Who care...whatever floats their boat.
I don't see it fair that two people who are of the opposite sex get married and they get tax breaks and everything else (including a divorce after about 10 years)..BUT two people of the same sex get treated differently.
Who cares.if married people would worry about themselves instead of two gays getting married, maybe the divorce rate would lower.
I am very thankful that I live the in US for this very reason. Morals...that's what this behavior harms. When pastors in churches are unable to say that God is against such behavior unless they are willing to be jailed, my religious freedoms and beliefs are put into question and taken away from me. I would never want my children learning in school that this is a good and acceptable lifestyle. It is against God and against the union of a man and a woman as husband and wife. I will go to my deathbed believing this is an unacceptable lifestyle for families.
This should be allowed everywhere in the USA.
My son %26 has partner have outlasted 2 of my son's aunts marriages--the 2 women have divorced 6 TIMES in the time my son has been with his partner.
So who is more committed here?
Do you have children?
Does your child have a mommy and a daddy?
From a psychological point of view, it "clouds" the child's way of thinking. It shows them that little Jimmy has two daddies. When your child begins to learn about anatomy, all of that goes down the pisser!
It has no affect on your marriage. That some object because it violates their religious beliefs is their personal problem, IMO -- if you believe gay marriage is wrong, don't enter one. But that someone else doesn't believe it's wrong and gets married doesn't have anything to do with you.
It makes Pokemon show up.
This is totally disgusting, and morally wrong.
I'm a happily married man and my wife a happily married woman ... 26 years now.
Our relationship has grown and gotten stronger through some times that were good and some other times that were not so good.
A personal commitment to another person (and the children that have come) has made us better people.
I hope the commitment Minister Smitherman will make will make him and his partner better people.
I don't feel that such a relationship will harm me or my family.
While I read your question, another question occurred to me that is if something such as a gay marriage being so openly discussed as if it were no different than the news of a traditional man %26 woman wedding then what makes the sanctity of marriage so sacred?
You wonder how the news quote harms you? Well, directly it doesn't, but indirectly it may. If you are raising children and do not take the time to discuss the moral effects of such a news release with them, they will be led to believe that if it is ok in parliment then it must be ok with the world. Reality is its not. Without dragging religion into this its simple to say "whatever floats their boat, its their life-their choice," But when looking at it from God's point of view...there was a reason he created man and woman. I'm sure you would like your lineage to continue in your area since it has been there already for over 200 years. If you have a son that turns out to be gay and marries another man, what are the odds that your bloodline will continue? Its easy to say the name will go on, all he has to do is adopt a child. But your families lineage stops there.
Thats my take on the whole situation. I hope I met your challenge with some good points.
It doesn't. My mom and her partner are married in Vermont--and it hasn't harmed me or my wife.
It's just the religious nuts and the right who believe it harms traditional family values and marriages.
Oddly enough, we have a higher divorce rate with traditional marriages--than we do with gay marriages. People are more than likely to cheat in their "traditional" marriage than they are--if they were married to the same sex.
Abuse is more common in traditional marriages than they are in gay ones.
And here's the kicker: Washington state recently okayed civil unions for gays and lesbians. The day before, some local and outspoken Christian sects said that this was a "threat to traditional marriages and family values". (According to a Christian family group spokesman.)
The day that gays and lesbians could go to Olympia to certify their marriages, NOT ONE Christian Family Group (or likewise) came out to PROTEST the moment at the state's marriage license office.
So my question is this: If civil unions are such a THREAT to traditional marriage, why aren't these like-minded groups out there protesting whenever some gay or lesbian couple gets married out in public or recieve their licenses?
The answer is simple: They are cowards. They don't have a real leg to stand on. Everything is built on hypocrisy and fear.
Fear of the unknown, fear of change.
It doesn't. If people would just learn not to judge the life styles of others, then they would really be as close to understanding God, as they think they are! *sm*
I am a recently divorced heterosexual woman. I apploud you Honorable Health Minister. I wish you and your partner all the best in life.
Garry Newlove. The dad who was killed by thugs. 3 teenagers have been arrested. If they are guilty, what...
should their punishment be? My heart breaks for his family. Bless you, Mr Newlove.
Answers:
My other half was threatened with a knife recently for confronting the local hoodies It scared the life out of me. We have an 8 month old baby.
The police promised to come round and take a statement and never did. Meanwhile the hooded ones are targetting us for their malice, banging on our doors and windows to wake up my baby every night (they are particularly vicious when they know my other half is at work in the evening), vandalising our cars etc.
These kids are well known to the police. They recently beat up a Dominos Pizza delivery man so badly (and stole his money) that the takeaways no longer delivery to our village. Yet the police have done nothing about them.
They also terrorise the life out of our disabled 86 year old neighbour.
My heart goes out to Mr Newlove's family. It is becoming all too common an occurence these days (Pete Woodhams also -another young dad was killed in front of his family for confronting a bunch of teenagers).
The police need to actually DO something about these cases, they need to patrol areas, arrest these kids when they so much as step out of line and give them real punishment. Not suspended sentences and slap on the wrist tactics (youth detention centres where they can play Playstation all day), but boot camp style kick-up-the-backside programmes where they can be taught that there are people out there much nastier and harder than them and that they have got to sort themselves out and become productive members of society.
They seem to have no respect for anyone or anything.
Put the litle devils in jail.. forever.
i personally think if you take someones life on purpose you should lose yours but being from the uk its not possible so i guess they should put them in a high security prison with all the rapists and pedophiles and leave them to rot.
my thoughts are with Garry's family
The lot of them should be convicted with murder!
But in reality only 1 or 2 will be convicted on a manslaughter charge, and they will be out in a couple of years!
A very long stretch at her Majesty's pleasure not some youth detention centre, its about time this government sent out a message that you are not above the law if you are a teen! If you take a life you lose yours should be the message.
I say they need to be punished. However Johnny Law chooses.
But I say charging them as adults should be a last resort because charging kids as adults is very hypocritical. It says a teen is old enough and responsible enough for punishment but to young and not responsible for rights and privileges. It's very 2 faced.
But if it was my dad they killed I would be the one going to jail 'cause I would killed them myself.!
public lynching!!
set an example of em...
harsh but its almost 4am and im tired, im pretty mean this time of night!
more realistically put them in the army,after they get a good kicking,and i mean GOOD.
Its so sad though, but i still think he did the right thing, just with the wrong consequences.I think people should carry on sticking up for their selves and belongings, just take a bat out with them or something.
Im hoping he's encouraged people to fight back and stand up for theirself and not be frightened, so his death isnt in vein.
to the guy below:
yeh true, army are fighting for the country and dont deserve to work with scum like that, prision in my opinion is an easy life unless you are a peodophile or rapist so public lynching it is.
Gas the little B@stards, slowly.!! To Emnie? the army wouldn't want anything to do with their sort, other than maybe to use 'em for target practice, because like it or not, that's all they are fit for. The PC and Bleeding heart brigade, ARE the cause, by mollycoddling the likes of that scum. My thoughts are with the family, of this brave man.
Exactly what the law says. And when they are banged up, put them in a cell with a man called 'horse' who has not had sex in 20 years...
My thoughts go out to the family as well. The letter from the daughter was heartbreaking.
i knew mr newlove and was good friends with one of his three daughters, zoe in highschool. who ever did this needs putting away for life. garry was fantastic man and would talk to anybody. xx
Being a fellow work colleague of Garry's this news has been traumatising for me and the rest of the staff Garry worked with. He was a Kind, Pleasent and an honest individual who enjoyed working with the Company. I cannot belive that kids of such an age would be capable of taking away an Innocent man's life. A man who has a family and his whole life ahead of him. Because of these thugs he can no longer live to see that. They should be punished for life, put in jail,and throw away the key. Why should they be allowed to walk a free fater a few years and this poor man lay in his grave? All he did was stand up for his rights, he was pretecting his home, he didnt deserve to be killed for this. I want them to rot away in jail and as much as i dont want to say this, but why should they be allowed to live after doing what they have done. They shouldnt be allowed to live they should behind bars.
My sympathiy goes out to Mt Newlove and his family.
An example must be made of the teenage thugs who took Mr Newlove's life there is no excuse. I suggest at least 20 years in prison before being considered for parole.
Sadly, we hear of this type of incident all too often these days and even more of anti social behaviour in our cities and our suberbs. The usual excuse is that "they have nothing to do." There may be an element of truth to this but it isw also true that some of these youths are too ill educated to think of anyhing creative they can do for themselves and are not brought up in a way that instills respect for others. The Government say that local residents must take back their own streets but the problem very often is fear. Local authorities, the police, courts, social services and central government must provide the backup neccessary to give local people the confidence to challenge anti social behaviour llong before it reaches crisis point.
No doubt the "Human Rights" lobby will claim that measures to challenge anti social behaviour are against these young people's human rights. This of course ignores the fact that these same youths are abusing the huiman rights iof the vast majority of the local residents. The right to go about their lawful business without fear of intimidation, attack, injury or even murder at the hands of a gang of local yobs
Answers:
My other half was threatened with a knife recently for confronting the local hoodies It scared the life out of me. We have an 8 month old baby.
The police promised to come round and take a statement and never did. Meanwhile the hooded ones are targetting us for their malice, banging on our doors and windows to wake up my baby every night (they are particularly vicious when they know my other half is at work in the evening), vandalising our cars etc.
These kids are well known to the police. They recently beat up a Dominos Pizza delivery man so badly (and stole his money) that the takeaways no longer delivery to our village. Yet the police have done nothing about them.
They also terrorise the life out of our disabled 86 year old neighbour.
My heart goes out to Mr Newlove's family. It is becoming all too common an occurence these days (Pete Woodhams also -another young dad was killed in front of his family for confronting a bunch of teenagers).
The police need to actually DO something about these cases, they need to patrol areas, arrest these kids when they so much as step out of line and give them real punishment. Not suspended sentences and slap on the wrist tactics (youth detention centres where they can play Playstation all day), but boot camp style kick-up-the-backside programmes where they can be taught that there are people out there much nastier and harder than them and that they have got to sort themselves out and become productive members of society.
They seem to have no respect for anyone or anything.
Put the litle devils in jail.. forever.
i personally think if you take someones life on purpose you should lose yours but being from the uk its not possible so i guess they should put them in a high security prison with all the rapists and pedophiles and leave them to rot.
my thoughts are with Garry's family
The lot of them should be convicted with murder!
But in reality only 1 or 2 will be convicted on a manslaughter charge, and they will be out in a couple of years!
A very long stretch at her Majesty's pleasure not some youth detention centre, its about time this government sent out a message that you are not above the law if you are a teen! If you take a life you lose yours should be the message.
I say they need to be punished. However Johnny Law chooses.
But I say charging them as adults should be a last resort because charging kids as adults is very hypocritical. It says a teen is old enough and responsible enough for punishment but to young and not responsible for rights and privileges. It's very 2 faced.
But if it was my dad they killed I would be the one going to jail 'cause I would killed them myself.!
public lynching!!
set an example of em...
harsh but its almost 4am and im tired, im pretty mean this time of night!
more realistically put them in the army,after they get a good kicking,and i mean GOOD.
Its so sad though, but i still think he did the right thing, just with the wrong consequences.I think people should carry on sticking up for their selves and belongings, just take a bat out with them or something.
Im hoping he's encouraged people to fight back and stand up for theirself and not be frightened, so his death isnt in vein.
to the guy below:
yeh true, army are fighting for the country and dont deserve to work with scum like that, prision in my opinion is an easy life unless you are a peodophile or rapist so public lynching it is.
Gas the little B@stards, slowly.!! To Emnie? the army wouldn't want anything to do with their sort, other than maybe to use 'em for target practice, because like it or not, that's all they are fit for. The PC and Bleeding heart brigade, ARE the cause, by mollycoddling the likes of that scum. My thoughts are with the family, of this brave man.
Exactly what the law says. And when they are banged up, put them in a cell with a man called 'horse' who has not had sex in 20 years...
My thoughts go out to the family as well. The letter from the daughter was heartbreaking.
i knew mr newlove and was good friends with one of his three daughters, zoe in highschool. who ever did this needs putting away for life. garry was fantastic man and would talk to anybody. xx
Being a fellow work colleague of Garry's this news has been traumatising for me and the rest of the staff Garry worked with. He was a Kind, Pleasent and an honest individual who enjoyed working with the Company. I cannot belive that kids of such an age would be capable of taking away an Innocent man's life. A man who has a family and his whole life ahead of him. Because of these thugs he can no longer live to see that. They should be punished for life, put in jail,and throw away the key. Why should they be allowed to walk a free fater a few years and this poor man lay in his grave? All he did was stand up for his rights, he was pretecting his home, he didnt deserve to be killed for this. I want them to rot away in jail and as much as i dont want to say this, but why should they be allowed to live after doing what they have done. They shouldnt be allowed to live they should behind bars.
My sympathiy goes out to Mt Newlove and his family.
An example must be made of the teenage thugs who took Mr Newlove's life there is no excuse. I suggest at least 20 years in prison before being considered for parole.
Sadly, we hear of this type of incident all too often these days and even more of anti social behaviour in our cities and our suberbs. The usual excuse is that "they have nothing to do." There may be an element of truth to this but it isw also true that some of these youths are too ill educated to think of anyhing creative they can do for themselves and are not brought up in a way that instills respect for others. The Government say that local residents must take back their own streets but the problem very often is fear. Local authorities, the police, courts, social services and central government must provide the backup neccessary to give local people the confidence to challenge anti social behaviour llong before it reaches crisis point.
No doubt the "Human Rights" lobby will claim that measures to challenge anti social behaviour are against these young people's human rights. This of course ignores the fact that these same youths are abusing the huiman rights iof the vast majority of the local residents. The right to go about their lawful business without fear of intimidation, attack, injury or even murder at the hands of a gang of local yobs
Gang problems in the US AND Canada.Why not make it so that gang members are guilty by association?
if you are a member ,you are guilty ,period.Automatic sentence,5 years.Repeat offense 10 years.
Answers:
Because there is a fine line between a "gang" and a "club", and which term your group is called is usually determined by how much money you make.
Besides, one of the cornerstones of our justice system is the principle that we don't hold anybody responsible for other people's actions unless they helped them commit their crime in some discernible way. Laws against associating with criminals in specific ways which support and assist their illegal acts such as "aiding and abetting", "conspiracy", "inciting violence", and being an "accomplice" to a crime already address this.
Yea that doesn't violate the constitution..
well, you have liberal whiners, and the ACLU who wouldnt like that idea much.
I personally feel that gang violence, drug abuse, and so forth is out of control, and that anyone who feels like stronger intervention is not required here obviously doesn't care about inner-city people.
I would definitley do harsh sentences for joining a gang that is on some official list of violent gangs. To me, these are terrorists who are destroying lives, disrupting the community, and bringing down our property values.
If I were a person living in the inner city I would be more afraid of a person in gang colors than a police officer, but some see law enforcement as the real threat.
My way of punishing and deterring violent gang membership would be to send them to do community service by day and sleep in a prison cell by night. They develop a strong work ethic, beautify the communities they helped damage, and are prevented from doing more gang violence, at least in the short term.
because if your in a gang your probabley gang banging and doing alot of things against the law but some people like to claim gangs and there not in it to so think of sending those inncent people to jail
I think that's against the constitution, and would set up a really bad precedent for making it illegal to be a member of all sorts of groups, such as the Junior League, or the Daughters of the Confederacy, or the Elk's Club, or the National Rifle Association, or the Human RIghts Campaign.
But if a gang is known to be violent, then I believe all legal measures should be taken to be rid of them and their guilty members serve extreme punishments.
What about this gang
Ex-CIA officer Slams US Allegations against Iran as Sham
In an alarming exposure of the acceleration and urgency of the American war party’s push towards catastrophic war with Iran, Philip Giraldi, former CIA counter terrorism officer, in an interview [1] on 24th July with Anti War Radio debunked the NeoCons’ repeated myth of Iran’s support for AlQaeda as a pretext for war. Whilst acknowledging Iran’s helpfulness in trying to establish security in both Afghanistan and Iraq, Giraldi spoke of the United States’ hypocritical and illegal support for terrorist separatists groups inside Iran, and various plans and scenarios which have been drawn up to destroy Iran’s military and economic infrastructure by massive bombardment, with the use of nuclear bombs a real and stated possibility.
Giraldi refuted the assumption that sharing hostilities towards the US, placed Iran and AlQaeda in the same camp and sharing similar agenda, arguing that Iran followed a very different agenda in its dealings with the US. He emphasised both the fact of Iranians’ helpfulness in Iraq, in terms of pushing for greater stability, and also their help and cooperation in Afghanistan, as well as the reality of the deep hostilities between Shiia Iran and Sunni extremism of AlQaeda. Giraldi recalled the major attack against the Iranian consulate general in Afghanistan by the Taliban, a close ally of AlQaeda, in which 11 Iranian diplomats were killed, and the regular AlQaeda violent attacks against Shiia population in Iraq, and concluded that a Shiia Iranian-AlQaeda alliance was not a plausible possibility.
He described the recent New York Sun’s allegation [2] that AlQaeda prisoners in Iran led terrorist operations inside Iraq under the advice of the Iranian government, as one of many propaganda pieces making a case for war. He said how in 2003, the Iranian government, through the Swiss embassy, had offered to hand over the six AlQaeda prisoners kept in Iran, which includes Osama Bin Laden’s son, in exchange for the US ceasing its support for the MEK, and how this offer was rejected by the US. He said of the MEK that it was sheltered and armed by Saddam against Iran, and now supported and armed by Pentagon against Iran.
Highlighting what he called American “ultimate hypocrisy”, Giraldi explained how the US government is supporting terrorist groups and ethnic division in Iran and charging the Iranians in Iraq for what the US was doing in Iran itself and with a lot more evidence. Giraldi talked of US’s support for Jundollah which he described as a Sunni Baluchi separatist group in eastern Iran that has launched deadly terrorist attacks inside Iran. He also spoke of US support for separatists amongst the Arab minority which is closer to the border with Iraq.
Giraldi repeated the alarm call he first made in his revelations in the American Conservative Magazine in 2005 that Dick Cheney, who has no authority under the constitution, had ordered the air force to draw up plans for air strike against Iran that even included the use of nuclear weapons. He said he thought there was a lot of evidence since then to suggest that nuclear weapons are still very much on the table and named Republican Senators such as McCain, Gilliani and Romney who had not “flinched at all” in the debate about the prospect of using nuclear weapons against Iran.
He spoke of various war scenarios cooked up by the war party. One scenario was of the automatic use of the nuclear weapons in order to reach and destroy the Iranian nuclear sites buried under ground. Another scenario was to use the nuclear threat if the “Iranians continue to fight back after we staged our attack”, the idea being “that’s what the nukes are for, our nukes that everybody knows that we in fact do have, is to tell them, listen, you are going to sit there and take it while we bomb you for a week or two and you are not going to fight back and if you do fight back then we will use nuclear weapons on you”, and he cited the example scenario of Iranians resisting by staging attack in the Strait of Hormouz or destabilising Afghanistan.
Setting out the horrifying context of the possibility of the US using nuclear strikes against Iran, under the pretext of destroying Iranian nuclear bombs which do not exist and Iran’s cooperation with AlQaeda, another propaganda fabrication, Giraldi drew attention to the recent warning to Iran and the threat of war issued by AlQaeda for Iran’s support for the Shiia government in Iraq, as well as AlQaeda’s constant horrific attacks inside Iraq targeting Shiia population and mosques.
Prof. Abbas Edalat of CASMII said today: “Giraldi’s revelations is consistent with and confirms the emergence of a shift in the dynamics of the American foreign policy decision making away from dialogue and in favour of war. The reality of the shared strategic interests between Iran and the US in stabilising Iraq and the possibility and great benefits for both countries in reaching a rapprochement in their bilateral relationship, based on mutual respect and cooperation rather than threat and coercion, is persistently obscured and sabotaged by the fanatical warmongers of Cheney camp and the Israeli lobby, who are relentlessly pushing for war”.
It is incumbent upon the media and journalists to give active voice to informed and conscientious individuals like Giraldi who have well-established connections within the intelligence community and are warning the international community about the impending catastrophic war against Iran.
For more information please contact CASMII or visit http://www.campaigniran.org
Notes
[1] http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/07/24/p...
[2] http://www.nysun.com/article/58599...
they would first have to establish a definition for the word gang. if you make guilt by association legal then alot of people would be going to prison just because of the people they associate with. it seems like a good idea, but remember the road to perdition was paved with good intentions.
Yes, I agree with tougher laws on those who are indeed lawbreakers...but I DO NOT agree with this concept of guilt by association. Quite frankly, what you are suggesting borders on the same thing that the Nazis did to the Jewish people...and it is a very severe form of discrimination.
Moreover, it is a violation of 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. Not to mention the Constitional provisions of due process, and an assumption of innocent until proven guilty!
Is it fair for a person to be punished for a crime they didn't commit? How would you like it if someone labeled YOU a gangmember just because you wore the "wrong" clothes or colors, had the "wrong friends or relatives" or had the "wrong" complexion or "wrong" ethnicty? "Wrong" as defined by the powers that be who may be biased themselves?
Should people be considered "guilty by association" because someone in your family was/is a gangmember but you've lived a clean, exemplary life?
Because they happen to be the innocent offspring of an alleged gangmenber?
What if you were a schoolteacher who had gangmembers in your classroom...that's an "association" of sorts?
What about a minister who may have gangmembers in their congregation...as there are many churches who work in inner city areas trying to end the problem with gangs?
What if you are the EMT tech or Doctor who treated a person who got shot during a drive-by shooting...who may or may not be a member of a gang.
What about the many people in the US, Canada and worldwide who made an ill informed choice, joined a gang, but saw the error of their ways, got out of the gang, and are now doing their best to start over clean?
Well, there are people like that...some of them ex-cons who have paid their debt to society! Yet if you had your way, you would continue to punish these people and anyone who walk within a mile of them over and over again, based on your own prejudices and irrational fears?
There are a lot of shades of gray in a so-called black and white world .
YAY! Every punk a@sed cop in the country gets to go to the pen, absolutely pass that amendment! Oh yeah, you thought that the Bloods %26 Crips were the only punk assed gangs oput there, huh? If it applies to the common man it must apply to the badged common a#s!!!
Sure if we put up a fence around california we might have enough room to jail them all
I agree with askthepizzaguy!!
There are communities that do exactly that. I'm not sure which ones they are, I'm sure you can look it up on Google. If a person is KNOWN to be a street gang member they are given particular investigative treatment by police. The sentence for any infraction of the law, drugs, guns, etc, is then compounded by this gang association. I'm all for it!
I'd like to think this question is not about social interaction but active gang membership. Period.
In Canada , we have a law regarding that already . A person can be charged AND convicted of "being a member of a criminal organization" .
We have all kids of strict laws regarding criminals , crime , the use of guns while perpetrating a crime , etc .
Yet Canada`s judicial system is a standing joke wordwide . Unfortunately , our justice system isn`t a joke if you live here ! The pathetic state of the travesty known as our "justice" system is due to the fact the people here have NO SAY in the appointment of judges at ANY level !
These "judges" are appointed by the government ... FOR LIFE ! They live in ivory towers , totally disconnected from reality . Many of them made extremely poor lawyers , but as a "favour" to them for supporting the government of the day , some of these idiots are appointed to the Supreme court ..... if you can believe that !
Canadian judges are convinced a sentence of a year or two for rape , murder , cop killings , child molestation and things of that nature will show criminals and gang members they mean business ! ..... ROFLMAO ! I swear it`s TRUE !!
So what`s the point of strict laws if they`re never going to be enforced or used in sentencing ?
This has been tried in the past and recently by many communities.
This is the most recent one.
http://www.thetandd.com/articles/2007/03...
There is also the "Rico act.
First, not all gangs are terrorists. All gangs are not even criminal -- even if some are.
Let's say all a gang ever does is petty theft (shoplifting) and minor vandalism (spraypainting buildings). Yes, these misdemeanors are criminal actions. But are you seriously saying they rise to the level of "terrorism" -- because if they do, then every criminal in the US would have to be considered a terrorist.
Someone already mentioned the Constitutional problems, since freedom of association is absolutely protected under the 1st Amendment. And yes, our govt has already got around that and has convicted people of felonies based solely on who they associate with -- without anyone actually having committed any other crime beyond mere association.
You want to punish people merely for social interaction -- talking to someone or being in their presence -- even if neither person has yet committed a crime, merely because someone ELSE has committed a crime.
Have we really gone so far down the road to fascism that you can be convicted and imprisoned just because you KNOW someone who knows someone ELSE who has committed a crime?
If we all played the "Guilty by association" game , 99% of our government would be in jail.
Answers:
Because there is a fine line between a "gang" and a "club", and which term your group is called is usually determined by how much money you make.
Besides, one of the cornerstones of our justice system is the principle that we don't hold anybody responsible for other people's actions unless they helped them commit their crime in some discernible way. Laws against associating with criminals in specific ways which support and assist their illegal acts such as "aiding and abetting", "conspiracy", "inciting violence", and being an "accomplice" to a crime already address this.
Yea that doesn't violate the constitution..
well, you have liberal whiners, and the ACLU who wouldnt like that idea much.
I personally feel that gang violence, drug abuse, and so forth is out of control, and that anyone who feels like stronger intervention is not required here obviously doesn't care about inner-city people.
I would definitley do harsh sentences for joining a gang that is on some official list of violent gangs. To me, these are terrorists who are destroying lives, disrupting the community, and bringing down our property values.
If I were a person living in the inner city I would be more afraid of a person in gang colors than a police officer, but some see law enforcement as the real threat.
My way of punishing and deterring violent gang membership would be to send them to do community service by day and sleep in a prison cell by night. They develop a strong work ethic, beautify the communities they helped damage, and are prevented from doing more gang violence, at least in the short term.
because if your in a gang your probabley gang banging and doing alot of things against the law but some people like to claim gangs and there not in it to so think of sending those inncent people to jail
I think that's against the constitution, and would set up a really bad precedent for making it illegal to be a member of all sorts of groups, such as the Junior League, or the Daughters of the Confederacy, or the Elk's Club, or the National Rifle Association, or the Human RIghts Campaign.
But if a gang is known to be violent, then I believe all legal measures should be taken to be rid of them and their guilty members serve extreme punishments.
What about this gang
Ex-CIA officer Slams US Allegations against Iran as Sham
In an alarming exposure of the acceleration and urgency of the American war party’s push towards catastrophic war with Iran, Philip Giraldi, former CIA counter terrorism officer, in an interview [1] on 24th July with Anti War Radio debunked the NeoCons’ repeated myth of Iran’s support for AlQaeda as a pretext for war. Whilst acknowledging Iran’s helpfulness in trying to establish security in both Afghanistan and Iraq, Giraldi spoke of the United States’ hypocritical and illegal support for terrorist separatists groups inside Iran, and various plans and scenarios which have been drawn up to destroy Iran’s military and economic infrastructure by massive bombardment, with the use of nuclear bombs a real and stated possibility.
Giraldi refuted the assumption that sharing hostilities towards the US, placed Iran and AlQaeda in the same camp and sharing similar agenda, arguing that Iran followed a very different agenda in its dealings with the US. He emphasised both the fact of Iranians’ helpfulness in Iraq, in terms of pushing for greater stability, and also their help and cooperation in Afghanistan, as well as the reality of the deep hostilities between Shiia Iran and Sunni extremism of AlQaeda. Giraldi recalled the major attack against the Iranian consulate general in Afghanistan by the Taliban, a close ally of AlQaeda, in which 11 Iranian diplomats were killed, and the regular AlQaeda violent attacks against Shiia population in Iraq, and concluded that a Shiia Iranian-AlQaeda alliance was not a plausible possibility.
He described the recent New York Sun’s allegation [2] that AlQaeda prisoners in Iran led terrorist operations inside Iraq under the advice of the Iranian government, as one of many propaganda pieces making a case for war. He said how in 2003, the Iranian government, through the Swiss embassy, had offered to hand over the six AlQaeda prisoners kept in Iran, which includes Osama Bin Laden’s son, in exchange for the US ceasing its support for the MEK, and how this offer was rejected by the US. He said of the MEK that it was sheltered and armed by Saddam against Iran, and now supported and armed by Pentagon against Iran.
Highlighting what he called American “ultimate hypocrisy”, Giraldi explained how the US government is supporting terrorist groups and ethnic division in Iran and charging the Iranians in Iraq for what the US was doing in Iran itself and with a lot more evidence. Giraldi talked of US’s support for Jundollah which he described as a Sunni Baluchi separatist group in eastern Iran that has launched deadly terrorist attacks inside Iran. He also spoke of US support for separatists amongst the Arab minority which is closer to the border with Iraq.
Giraldi repeated the alarm call he first made in his revelations in the American Conservative Magazine in 2005 that Dick Cheney, who has no authority under the constitution, had ordered the air force to draw up plans for air strike against Iran that even included the use of nuclear weapons. He said he thought there was a lot of evidence since then to suggest that nuclear weapons are still very much on the table and named Republican Senators such as McCain, Gilliani and Romney who had not “flinched at all” in the debate about the prospect of using nuclear weapons against Iran.
He spoke of various war scenarios cooked up by the war party. One scenario was of the automatic use of the nuclear weapons in order to reach and destroy the Iranian nuclear sites buried under ground. Another scenario was to use the nuclear threat if the “Iranians continue to fight back after we staged our attack”, the idea being “that’s what the nukes are for, our nukes that everybody knows that we in fact do have, is to tell them, listen, you are going to sit there and take it while we bomb you for a week or two and you are not going to fight back and if you do fight back then we will use nuclear weapons on you”, and he cited the example scenario of Iranians resisting by staging attack in the Strait of Hormouz or destabilising Afghanistan.
Setting out the horrifying context of the possibility of the US using nuclear strikes against Iran, under the pretext of destroying Iranian nuclear bombs which do not exist and Iran’s cooperation with AlQaeda, another propaganda fabrication, Giraldi drew attention to the recent warning to Iran and the threat of war issued by AlQaeda for Iran’s support for the Shiia government in Iraq, as well as AlQaeda’s constant horrific attacks inside Iraq targeting Shiia population and mosques.
Prof. Abbas Edalat of CASMII said today: “Giraldi’s revelations is consistent with and confirms the emergence of a shift in the dynamics of the American foreign policy decision making away from dialogue and in favour of war. The reality of the shared strategic interests between Iran and the US in stabilising Iraq and the possibility and great benefits for both countries in reaching a rapprochement in their bilateral relationship, based on mutual respect and cooperation rather than threat and coercion, is persistently obscured and sabotaged by the fanatical warmongers of Cheney camp and the Israeli lobby, who are relentlessly pushing for war”.
It is incumbent upon the media and journalists to give active voice to informed and conscientious individuals like Giraldi who have well-established connections within the intelligence community and are warning the international community about the impending catastrophic war against Iran.
For more information please contact CASMII or visit http://www.campaigniran.org
Notes
[1] http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/07/24/p...
[2] http://www.nysun.com/article/58599...
they would first have to establish a definition for the word gang. if you make guilt by association legal then alot of people would be going to prison just because of the people they associate with. it seems like a good idea, but remember the road to perdition was paved with good intentions.
Yes, I agree with tougher laws on those who are indeed lawbreakers...but I DO NOT agree with this concept of guilt by association. Quite frankly, what you are suggesting borders on the same thing that the Nazis did to the Jewish people...and it is a very severe form of discrimination.
Moreover, it is a violation of 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. Not to mention the Constitional provisions of due process, and an assumption of innocent until proven guilty!
Is it fair for a person to be punished for a crime they didn't commit? How would you like it if someone labeled YOU a gangmember just because you wore the "wrong" clothes or colors, had the "wrong friends or relatives" or had the "wrong" complexion or "wrong" ethnicty? "Wrong" as defined by the powers that be who may be biased themselves?
Should people be considered "guilty by association" because someone in your family was/is a gangmember but you've lived a clean, exemplary life?
Because they happen to be the innocent offspring of an alleged gangmenber?
What if you were a schoolteacher who had gangmembers in your classroom...that's an "association" of sorts?
What about a minister who may have gangmembers in their congregation...as there are many churches who work in inner city areas trying to end the problem with gangs?
What if you are the EMT tech or Doctor who treated a person who got shot during a drive-by shooting...who may or may not be a member of a gang.
What about the many people in the US, Canada and worldwide who made an ill informed choice, joined a gang, but saw the error of their ways, got out of the gang, and are now doing their best to start over clean?
Well, there are people like that...some of them ex-cons who have paid their debt to society! Yet if you had your way, you would continue to punish these people and anyone who walk within a mile of them over and over again, based on your own prejudices and irrational fears?
There are a lot of shades of gray in a so-called black and white world .
YAY! Every punk a@sed cop in the country gets to go to the pen, absolutely pass that amendment! Oh yeah, you thought that the Bloods %26 Crips were the only punk assed gangs oput there, huh? If it applies to the common man it must apply to the badged common a#s!!!
Sure if we put up a fence around california we might have enough room to jail them all
I agree with askthepizzaguy!!
There are communities that do exactly that. I'm not sure which ones they are, I'm sure you can look it up on Google. If a person is KNOWN to be a street gang member they are given particular investigative treatment by police. The sentence for any infraction of the law, drugs, guns, etc, is then compounded by this gang association. I'm all for it!
I'd like to think this question is not about social interaction but active gang membership. Period.
In Canada , we have a law regarding that already . A person can be charged AND convicted of "being a member of a criminal organization" .
We have all kids of strict laws regarding criminals , crime , the use of guns while perpetrating a crime , etc .
Yet Canada`s judicial system is a standing joke wordwide . Unfortunately , our justice system isn`t a joke if you live here ! The pathetic state of the travesty known as our "justice" system is due to the fact the people here have NO SAY in the appointment of judges at ANY level !
These "judges" are appointed by the government ... FOR LIFE ! They live in ivory towers , totally disconnected from reality . Many of them made extremely poor lawyers , but as a "favour" to them for supporting the government of the day , some of these idiots are appointed to the Supreme court ..... if you can believe that !
Canadian judges are convinced a sentence of a year or two for rape , murder , cop killings , child molestation and things of that nature will show criminals and gang members they mean business ! ..... ROFLMAO ! I swear it`s TRUE !!
So what`s the point of strict laws if they`re never going to be enforced or used in sentencing ?
This has been tried in the past and recently by many communities.
This is the most recent one.
http://www.thetandd.com/articles/2007/03...
There is also the "Rico act.
First, not all gangs are terrorists. All gangs are not even criminal -- even if some are.
Let's say all a gang ever does is petty theft (shoplifting) and minor vandalism (spraypainting buildings). Yes, these misdemeanors are criminal actions. But are you seriously saying they rise to the level of "terrorism" -- because if they do, then every criminal in the US would have to be considered a terrorist.
Someone already mentioned the Constitutional problems, since freedom of association is absolutely protected under the 1st Amendment. And yes, our govt has already got around that and has convicted people of felonies based solely on who they associate with -- without anyone actually having committed any other crime beyond mere association.
You want to punish people merely for social interaction -- talking to someone or being in their presence -- even if neither person has yet committed a crime, merely because someone ELSE has committed a crime.
Have we really gone so far down the road to fascism that you can be convicted and imprisoned just because you KNOW someone who knows someone ELSE who has committed a crime?
If we all played the "Guilty by association" game , 99% of our government would be in jail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)