when you mis up the letters in the word Mother- In -Law they make a word that can describe a Mother-In-Law. What is the word?
Answers:
Woman Hitler.
????
other-in-law
woah I dont know dude
Woman Hitler
woman hitler!
i know this one and they got the movie out monster in law with jlo i like that movie thats one of my favorite
monster-in-law
brain..broken, *drools*
other-n-aw?
monster
Lawless???
I don't get it. But I'm just trying.
WOMAN HITLER...yeh i spent 10 min lookin through my emails cause i just got one that had that and somebody already said it...i'm never gettin that time back...lol
Woman Hitler!
woman hitler
mom-in-law
almoner whit
almoner with
amin whortle
antre whilom
armhole twin
aroint whelm
awhirl monte
awl thermion
eloin warmth
enorm withal
etamin whorl
harm towline
harmin owlet
harmin towel
holm tawnier
holm tinware
holt wireman
horntail mew
hotline warm
how terminal
how tramline
howl minaret
howl raiment
howler matin
howlet inarm
hwan motlier
inarm howlet
inmate whorl
inthral meow
lathier mown
latrine whom
law thermion
lawn mothier
lemon wraith
linter whamo
lither woman
loam writhen
lomein thraw
lomein wrath
lomenta whir
loth wireman
maile thrown
main whortle
maline rowth
maline throw
maline whort
maline worth
maline wroth
manhole writ
martin whole
matin howler
matron while
melon wraith
menial rowth
menial throw
menial whort
menial worth
menial wroth
menorah wilt
menthol wair
meow inthral
mew horntail
mina whortle
minaret howl
minor wealth
minot whaler
mola writhen
molar whiten
moline thraw
moline wrath
monel wraith
monte awhirl
month wailer
moral whiten
mortal whine
mothier lawn
motlier hwan
mown lathier
neath wormil
neolith warm
normal white
normal withe
oilman threw
oilmen thraw
oilmen wrath
olein warmth
omenta whirl
omental whir
owlet harmin
raiment howl
ration whelm
ratline whom
reliant whom
retinal whom
retinol wham
rowth maline
rowth menial
tamein whorl
tawnier holm
telamon whir
terminal how
terminal who
thane wormil
thermal wino
thermion awl
thermion law
thraw lomein
thraw moline
thraw oilmen
threw oilman
throw maline
throw menial
thrown maile
tinware holm
towel harmin
towline harm
tramline how
tramline who
trenail whom
twin armhole
wailer month
wair menthol
warm hotline
warm neolith
warmth eloin
warmth olein
wealth minor
whaler minot
wham retinol
whamo linter
whelm aroint
whelm ration
while matron
whilom antre
whine mortal
whir lomenta
whir omental
whir telamon
whirl omenta
whit almoner
white normal
whiten molar
whiten moral
who terminal
who tramline
whole martin
whom latrine
whom ratline
whom reliant
whom retinal
whom trenail
whorl etamin
whorl inmate
whorl tamein
whort maline
whort menial
whortle amin
whortle main
whortle mina
wilt menorah
wino thermal
wireman holt
wireman loth
with almoner
withal enorm
withe normal
woman lither
wormil neath
wormil thane
worth maline
worth menial
wraith lemon
wraith melon
wraith monel
wrath lomein
wrath moline
wrath oilmen
writ manhole
writhen loam
writhen mola
wroth maline
wroth menial
I hope the one you are looking for is amongst these:-))
the best i can come up with is...hitlerwoman.
pls give a clue. what letter does the word start?
I thought only ONE word. woman hitler is two words.
Woman Hitler... showed that one to my grandma years ago.
the word from mother in law would be for the first word
take the w from law the o from mother the m from mother and the a from law and then the n from in making the word woman the reamining letters will be t h i l e r which when unscrabled will be hitler
thus the anser u r looking for is WOMAN HITLER
u can also add a few letters and say HITLER IS A WOMAN
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
1/2 million protestors in California for the immigration laws, whats your view?
Answers:
I oppose amnesty for illegals, no matter what! I am in favor of those who enter through legal means. I would like to know how many of the 500,000 protesters, were legal US citizens? I'm sure most were not. I do not feel it is fair to those who came here through legal means, nor do I feel it is the responsibility of those of us who regularly pay taxes to pay for health care, education, and welfare of those who sneak into this country. Not to mention the cost to the communities for law enforcement.
I think anyone who harbors an illegal should be prosecuted for aiding and abetting criminals. If the Church harbors illegals, it should not only loose tax free status, but the priest or minister should also be brought to justice. Same thing for employers-if you pander to illegals you should be arrested.
And for those who claim illegals work jobs that Americans won't, I say if all employers paid a decent wage, there are plenty of Americans willing to work. Secondly, if there is such a shortage of workers, let's put the people on welfare to work, and get them off the welfare lines.
Unless you are an American Indian, we are all immigrants, or of immigrant heritage. The issue today is not with immigrants, but with those who have not followed the law to come to the US. They will state, we are good law abiding people who just want a shot at the American dream. The fact is they have ILLEGALY entered this country. The are NOT law abiding people. If they ignore immigration laws, what else will they ignore?
No, I am not against immigrants, just those who illegally enter this country and then DEMAND they be given the same rights as a legal citizen.
Stop calling them "illegal immigrants."
They are human beings, just like you and me, trying to find a better life. For the vast majority of us, the fact that we live in the U.S. is pure, dumb luck: We had the right parents. Imagine having been born in China or Cuba or Korea; wouldn't you risk life and limb to come to the United States, especially if you had children?
We should figure out a way to WELCOME them and make their lives and our country better and stronger.
This anti-immigrant crap is just xenophobic BS.
My ancestors paid to board a boat, immigrate LEGALLY, sign in with the immigration authorities, pay the fees necessary, learned the language and culture, set up roots and any money earned here STAYED here. Or some marry a citizen. If someone comes to this country ANY OTHER WAY they need to get the hell out.
Tater Salad is right...they should come to America the legal way.
I live in New Mexico...and the border isn't too far from here. Every single summer, on the news, there's always another story about a group of Mexicans found dead from heat exaustion while trying to make it over here. The immigration laws need to be stronger.
To Kyle M...unfortuantly, children are included in the victims of heat exaustion. I don't know about you, but I would never put my children in harms way like that...I'd do it the legal way.
How many of you that do not want illegals want to pick tomatoes for a living. I bet none. I don't like Bush and feel he will screw it up along with the American people but his idea of guest workers is a good idea on paper.
I think INS should have had a couple dozen buses at the rally to pick up the illegals and send them back to Mexico.
its absurd and laughable to think we can live in america without migrant workers. they are the backbone of our food industry. Most american born citizens wont even touch have the jobs migrant workers do. as what "TATER SALAD" said, i am very impressed that you father's fathers came here and went through every single piece of red tape there was back then, which was very little. its 100 years later and a new america, quit whipping out 100 year old arguements, its tacky.
migrant workers are here to stay, whether you want it or not. our food economy would fall apart at the seams if we didnt have them. send them all back? i hope you like paying 12 dollars for a lb of oranges
I don't know anyone that wants to stop immigration...they simply want people to come her legally as opposed to sneaking in. This is a national security issue, not some racist xenophobic conspiracy as some might suggest.
They do NOT all come here to work. Did you know that 33 percent of our prison population is now comprised of non-citizens?
I'd much rather the government subsidize vegetable farms so that they can pay workers (LEGAL workers) a living wage rather than covering all the health care, prison, and all the other costs associated with illegals!
Of course, I'm not holding my breath. The republican party couldn't organize a barbecue, much less do something about illegal immigration.
1. how does the concept of justice affect the law in the united states?
Answers:
As an interested observer (law student) I'd have to say: Not much, except by accident.
Most public laws are about setting community standards and enforcing particular points of view. Occasionally, those laws are based on an enlightened objective sense of what is best for everyone, to ensure which is fairness and equality. That is one definition of justice.
However, more often than not, laws are made because a majority of people believe one way and seek to force everyone else to adhere to their beliefs. This is the classic "Might Makes Right" approach of a partisan democracy. In other words, whoever is in the majority gets to make the rules, regardless of what the minority thinks.
If you happen to be in the majority on any given issue, then the ruling may look like justice to you. But if you are not, then being forced to do something that you don't approve just because you are in the minority doesn't sound like justice to me.
Couple of examples:
Is it justice to be able to hold people indefinitely, without access to an attorney, without charges, and without a trial -- just becomes one official designates that person as a threat? Apparently, it is legal (see Jose Padilla, Gito, etc.) But I don't think it is just.
Or take the recent law sponsored by Senator McCain which outlaws torture. 89 (of 100) Senators voted in favor of that law. To me, prohibiting torture is a good step towards justice. But 10 Senators voted AGAINST that law, saying that torture is OK in some situations. How is that just?
~*Do You Think The Anti-Immigrant Laws R Fair?*~?
im mexican and in my opinion I think it is wrong because to make every immigrant leave this country wether they r black,chinease or hispanic and if we leave this country will go down the drain because we maitain the economy and we work hard 2 make this country look good
Answers:
Hells no!i agree on what u r saying!!
F*** no :(
Fair no. Life is not fair but the country would not "go down the drain."
So you should get to stay because there are so many of you that our laws are not important?
If that is the way things go; then what laws can we expect you to ignore next? Maybe the one that says you must pay taxes or how about the one's that say you can't hurt others?
There is no "anti-immigrant" law that will "make every immigrant leave this county." And no one is trying to make a law like that.
Whoever is telling you this is the case is mistaken. Congress IS talking about making new laws about immigration, but NOT laws that are "anti-immigrant". They are trying to find a way to solve the problem of ILLEGAL immigration. Immigrants who come here legally are still very welcome!!
illegals hurt the economy, they broke the law when coming here and should be deported.
if you are here illegaly then your are a criminal and should be deported
Only those targeting ILLEGAL ALIENS that are violating the law by having fraudulent documents, by overstaying a visa, or crossing a border without the proper documents
no way!
Answers:
Hells no!i agree on what u r saying!!
F*** no :(
Fair no. Life is not fair but the country would not "go down the drain."
So you should get to stay because there are so many of you that our laws are not important?
If that is the way things go; then what laws can we expect you to ignore next? Maybe the one that says you must pay taxes or how about the one's that say you can't hurt others?
There is no "anti-immigrant" law that will "make every immigrant leave this county." And no one is trying to make a law like that.
Whoever is telling you this is the case is mistaken. Congress IS talking about making new laws about immigration, but NOT laws that are "anti-immigrant". They are trying to find a way to solve the problem of ILLEGAL immigration. Immigrants who come here legally are still very welcome!!
illegals hurt the economy, they broke the law when coming here and should be deported.
if you are here illegaly then your are a criminal and should be deported
Only those targeting ILLEGAL ALIENS that are violating the law by having fraudulent documents, by overstaying a visa, or crossing a border without the proper documents
no way!
?what is the law regarding pointing and presenting a firearm?
Answers:
If you fear for your life or your family's..nothing will happen. You have a right to defend yourself. But be smart.
If you cant prove fear of life then brandishing a firearm is one of several things you may be charged with if you point a firearm. There are other charges you'll be slapped with also.
I suggest ANYONE who has or is thinking of obtaining a firearm read this book..it only costs a couple buck and is a real eye opener. Very plain language without all that "legalese". This one is a california edition, laws in your state may vary.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0964286483/qid=1145804767/sr=2-3/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_3/002-1006831-6660060?s=books%26v=glance%26n=283155
I don't know about state laws but the fed says that pointing a gun is the same as firing a gun while aiming it at someone, ie 7 years if it is done in the commission of a crime.
Wow, you can get in real trouble. being from a state that allows you to carry and bare arms it is made absolutely clear that when you pull that fire arm out you best be ready to go to jail. For if you use it in self defense or to stop someone from harming another, you will be charged with threatening or murder, depending which you do. However, you will eventually be cleared.
You must warn the person or person before you draw your weapon that you are about to do so. Do it loudly and often and quick and then take action. Never draw unless you intend to take action, or you may wind up dead.
Pointing and presenting a firearm is a text book definition of the common law crime of assault. Every state has adopted this common law crime in their penal code, although it may be called by different names - aggravated assault, offer-type assault, etc. Bottom line its a crime in every jurisdiction a significant jail time (5years) is a possibility.
JUST DON'T DO IT!
?What do you think about this new law about immigration they want to pass/?
Answers:
Imagine this: All of them gone, who will do the things they did for next to no pay. Our minimum wages are alot compared to what they earn in their home country. The economy would suffer. Less people to buy and pay taxes on their purchases. They buy and take back with them to their loved ones.
Now envision this:
A program where they pay the government for permission to work and earn wages legally. Instead of paying it to coyotes who leave them to die in the desserts. We would know where they are, they would pay income tax just like the rest of us, instead of keeping a little to live off of and sending a great majority to their homeland. They would be allowed to stay for a certain amount of time with the condition they pay income tax then they must return to their homeland and make space for other immigrants to do the same with the same conditions. They would have a waiting period before they could do it again.
Right now the only taxes that are collected is in what ever they purchase.
Think about it......
Its great. Least they are doing something.
There are jobs in the US that a lot of Americans would not do. I feel that the people coming here deserve a chance just like anybody else. Most of them are hard working. Americans have become lazy and just do what they can to get by when it comes to working, so they have etched themselves out of jobs.
It is certainly better than pretending there is no problem at all. People need to realized that immigration is an issue instead of hiding underneath a barrel. The only people who do not want tougher immigration laws are those that are benefiting from weak or no immigration law Whatsoever. America is a nation based on laws so I am thinking at this point that if America wants to continue being great it needs to toughen up on it's immigration policies or become a third world nation itself.
Will appreciate some one here give us a link on the new Immigration Law .. thanks in advance
At least this will shut the racists up. Building a fence is such a joke,they will find a way to scale it.This country is becoming so Neo-Nazi.I guess now we'll see all the American people fighting over all those dishwasher and landscaping jobs now.
Dear Curious Me:
Imagine this: We already have a system exactly as you described. It's called...hold on to your seat...
LEGAL IMMIGRATION!!
think about it...
Dear Chulapanama: You are so shortsighted...you really believe everything you hear, don't you? THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE! My father was put out of business by them!! He was a private contractor/painter. They charge so little for their spray paint jobs on people's homes, and they are able to do that because they have no liscence to do contractor work and no insurance and pay no business or income taxes...their costs are lower because of these things. And do any of you know any high school students who would like a weekend/evening job but can't get one at McDonald's, etc? I do! And many other places that would have hired them in the past just don't, because they can hire undocumented ILLEGAL workers. And let's not forget that they don't come here alone...or if they do, they soon send for their family...wife and 4 or 5 or 6 kids...or maybe they just bring 2 and have the other 3 or 4 here on TAXPAYER MONEY!! And then we have to provide healthcare and education to them!!
Dear ryacosta89 (below): You should think before you write something that dumb. Do you think that McDonald's and other companies which hire illegal workers are really paying them what they are owed? Do they pay them minimum wage? Do they get payed for every hour worked? Do you think they don't treat them like slaves? If this is what you think, you are clearly very naive, dreaming, or both. Educate yourself!
The U.S. has other things to worry about than to block off immigrants ad build a multimillion dollar fence. Like the budget (which Congress made it legal to accumulate 9 tril in debt) the war, the continously rotting educational system and the crippled standards. Just the other day i took the high school exit exam and 90% of the questions where basic mathimatics... as in 7th grade math. Even the teachers said it was 7th grade math. I have the official California exit exam study guide if you want to look at it.
And for the person above who said this
"And do any of you know any high school students who would like a weekend/evening job but can't get one at McDonald's, etc? I do!"
By law everyone has to recieve at leat minimum wage (7.50 in CA). So both you and the immigrant would get paid the same. And I think they would higher someone who has proficient english than the guy who can bearly speak it. And McDonalds isn't stupid enough to get into legal trouble when the police find out they are highernig illegal immigrants. They would get into so much trouble. Think before you say things.
(law) what is required in a SWORN VERIFICATION...when used in the answering of interrogatories???
after I sent in my interrogatories the law firm said it didn't include a sworn verification. what is it a sworn verification and how do I do it properly.
Answers:
A sworn verification is a legal form that states that you are the Plaintiff/Defendant, that you have read the answers to Interrogatories and that they are true and correct. You sign that and it is notarized and then attached to your answers to interrogatories. They do that so that if and when your case goes to trial, and you change your answer on the witness stand, they can try to prove that you are lying.
I would think that it is a testimony that your interrogatories are correct. You should just call your law firm to be sure exactly what to do, and how to do it. Thats what you're paying them for.
Its the statement where you swear before a notary public that your responses to same are true and correct to the best of your knowledge. Your attorney should have already had this prepared for you.
****
Best bet is have your attorney look into this matter. It is standard practice in the law firm that I work for that Answers to Interrogatories be notarized.
knjordan33 is correct. However, interrogatory responses are rarely, if ever, notarized. A sworn statement signed by you under penalty of perjury is sufficient.
Answers:
A sworn verification is a legal form that states that you are the Plaintiff/Defendant, that you have read the answers to Interrogatories and that they are true and correct. You sign that and it is notarized and then attached to your answers to interrogatories. They do that so that if and when your case goes to trial, and you change your answer on the witness stand, they can try to prove that you are lying.
I would think that it is a testimony that your interrogatories are correct. You should just call your law firm to be sure exactly what to do, and how to do it. Thats what you're paying them for.
Its the statement where you swear before a notary public that your responses to same are true and correct to the best of your knowledge. Your attorney should have already had this prepared for you.
****
Best bet is have your attorney look into this matter. It is standard practice in the law firm that I work for that Answers to Interrogatories be notarized.
knjordan33 is correct. However, interrogatory responses are rarely, if ever, notarized. A sworn statement signed by you under penalty of perjury is sufficient.
"Who? or What? is the Officially accepted author, composer, legislator of the laws governing the United States
Is there a single person or document that declares for an absolute certainty the soveriegn right to impose penalties for the laws which govern our Nation? Is It the Constitution, from where does that document deem its authority? Is it the Bill of rights? and where does the ultimate soveriegnty rest.
Answers:
Nope. The laws in our country protect us from absolute authority... there have been a few ammendments added but for the most part, it's all we the people. Not just one person signs a bill around here... The declaration of Independance has multiple signatures on it.
(would someone just tell that to our current President?)
The consititution is the closest thing we have to a "book of rules". Even that was put together and signed by multiple people from 12 different states:
GEO WASHINGTON-- 1st Presidt.
[Signed also by the deputies of twelve States.]
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman
Geo. Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jacob Broom
Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King
James MCHenry
Dan. of St. Thos. Jenifer
Danl. Carroll
Wm. Saml. Johnson
Roger Sherman
Alexander Hamilton
John Blair--
James Madison Jr.
Wil. Livingston
David Brearley.
Wm. Paterson.
Jona. Dayton
Wm. Blount
Richd. Dobbs Spaight.
Hu Williamson
B. Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robt. Morris
Geo. Clymer
Thos. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson
Gouv Morris
J. Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler
William Few
Abr Baldwin
William Jackson, Secretary
The Constitution and the Bill of rights derive their authority from the consent of the governed.
I am freeing men from the burden of freedom which only a few can bear.
-Adolf Hitler
Answers:
Nope. The laws in our country protect us from absolute authority... there have been a few ammendments added but for the most part, it's all we the people. Not just one person signs a bill around here... The declaration of Independance has multiple signatures on it.
(would someone just tell that to our current President?)
The consititution is the closest thing we have to a "book of rules". Even that was put together and signed by multiple people from 12 different states:
GEO WASHINGTON-- 1st Presidt.
[Signed also by the deputies of twelve States.]
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman
Geo. Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jacob Broom
Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King
James MCHenry
Dan. of St. Thos. Jenifer
Danl. Carroll
Wm. Saml. Johnson
Roger Sherman
Alexander Hamilton
John Blair--
James Madison Jr.
Wil. Livingston
David Brearley.
Wm. Paterson.
Jona. Dayton
Wm. Blount
Richd. Dobbs Spaight.
Hu Williamson
B. Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robt. Morris
Geo. Clymer
Thos. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson
Gouv Morris
J. Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler
William Few
Abr Baldwin
William Jackson, Secretary
The Constitution and the Bill of rights derive their authority from the consent of the governed.
I am freeing men from the burden of freedom which only a few can bear.
-Adolf Hitler
"there is a time to make things happen and a time to let things happen"?
why should this be a law of life?
Answers:
This old prayer may help clarify:
God, grant me the wisdom to change the things that I can, accept the things that I cannot change, and the wisdom to know the difference.
Sometimes the best thing to do is to just sit back and watch things unfold. You can continue to fight, but some situations will only chew you up if you try.
well, like it or not, this seems to be true, to whatever end. too many people think it's all run by fate. too many also think they have control over everything. let's all just live in between.
We apparently have two choices and those you mentiones are the choices. Whether we like it or not, we'll have to face it.
things that are supposed to happen will happen. whether we want them to or not. we are given free will, which, if used, will give us the opportunity to avert death to a point. i'm struggling with this question, and others like it because i lost my husband while i was 5 months pregnant. i've been doing a lot of reading about the afterlife, and this has led me to several conclusions, and more questions of the reality of which we live. based on what i've read, we choose where we are born, to whom we are born, the path we are to travel (generalized, remember, we have free will), the people, places, etc. we are to experience. we even choose our spouses. the whole purpose, according to the literature i've read, for us being here is to learn. we are in school, so to speak. we can alter our paths with the use of our free will. but the things i don't understand is how the authors say there are no such things as accidents or coincidences. if that's the case, then what about free will? is that not a contributor to death some of the time?
Answers:
This old prayer may help clarify:
God, grant me the wisdom to change the things that I can, accept the things that I cannot change, and the wisdom to know the difference.
Sometimes the best thing to do is to just sit back and watch things unfold. You can continue to fight, but some situations will only chew you up if you try.
well, like it or not, this seems to be true, to whatever end. too many people think it's all run by fate. too many also think they have control over everything. let's all just live in between.
We apparently have two choices and those you mentiones are the choices. Whether we like it or not, we'll have to face it.
things that are supposed to happen will happen. whether we want them to or not. we are given free will, which, if used, will give us the opportunity to avert death to a point. i'm struggling with this question, and others like it because i lost my husband while i was 5 months pregnant. i've been doing a lot of reading about the afterlife, and this has led me to several conclusions, and more questions of the reality of which we live. based on what i've read, we choose where we are born, to whom we are born, the path we are to travel (generalized, remember, we have free will), the people, places, etc. we are to experience. we even choose our spouses. the whole purpose, according to the literature i've read, for us being here is to learn. we are in school, so to speak. we can alter our paths with the use of our free will. but the things i don't understand is how the authors say there are no such things as accidents or coincidences. if that's the case, then what about free will? is that not a contributor to death some of the time?
"So nice" mother in law?
I have a "so nice" mother in law. She wants to know everything, asks about our children plannings, our emotions, she is woryng about us all the time... Do we have ANYTHING to eat, did something bad happened on the trip, asks very personal questions and experiences me and my husband as some kids who can not take care of themselves. She is not interrested in our careers or friends. I feel so stupid and so disturbed when talking with her, but I can not do anything cause she is so nice, so helpless, doing everything "in good faith". I hate her. How to find a best way to make her respect our privacy and take some distance from us?
Answers:
Set boundaries and enforce them!
First, confront her about her behavior in a nice way. Don't lay blame on her; give specific examples of the behavior you don't like and why it annoys you. For example, "It makes me uncomfortable when you ask so many personal questions. (Insert examples of specific questions here)." Then, set your boundaries...for example, "The next time you ask a question that makes me uncomfortable, I will tell you so, and I will not answer it."
Follow through, gently reminding her of your conversation when she slips up. Also, you many want to put a limit on the number of times she calls/visits. Enforce those limits, too; say, "I'm sorry, but I have to go. As you know, I agreed to talk to you for 10 minutes, and that time is up now." If she shows up at your house, tell her, "Sorry, but we were just leaving." Then do so, even if you only drive around the block!
Of course, your spouse will need to support you in this and maintain the boundaries, too.
Good luck!
Dr. Barb Lesniak, http://www.bnlifeskills.com
Move!! And do not tell where you are moving to.LoL!! Ummm , there really isn't anything to do , unles you can get your husband or yourself to talk to her.
Tell you and your family are fine. Then ask her about her circumstances. I'll bet see is really worried about herself not you. It's just coming out that way.
I have that same problem. Acutally, I HAD that same problem. I moved two hours away, but she still came for a while in the beginning. However, I started to make her feel unwelcomed in my house, and now she is not involved in our lives. Plus it's too far for her to travel all the time.
i think you should just be grateful that you have a mother in law that is nice and well meaning and truely cares,but in return your talking about her behind her back, your the one that said that she's nice and why would she care about your friends? you need to lighten up and count your blessings that you have a "so nice mother in law" others don't .
I have to agree with sweet qt.. I could not have said it any better! great answer!!
You do not owe your mother-in-law an explanation about anything. Unless you want her to know something do not tell her anything. Your husband needs to step in and back you up on this. If she starts in, change the subject and do not discuss anything with her that you do not wish her to know. She may be nice but she is way too nosy.
i agree with sweet qt and dixierock it's not about owing her an explanation she's trying to let you know that she's there for you no matter what you need whether if it's help with food or just somebody to talk to, if you don't want that then let her know , you said she's a so nice mother in law , your upset because she's asking you if you have anything to eat? did something bad happen on the trip? omg..will you get over yourself, if you do move and take the grandkids far from her, i hope you and husband will never get into a situation where you need her if somebody gets injured or fired or something like that coz even though you have a "so nice mother" in law she got a "so nasty daughter in law"
Answers:
Set boundaries and enforce them!
First, confront her about her behavior in a nice way. Don't lay blame on her; give specific examples of the behavior you don't like and why it annoys you. For example, "It makes me uncomfortable when you ask so many personal questions. (Insert examples of specific questions here)." Then, set your boundaries...for example, "The next time you ask a question that makes me uncomfortable, I will tell you so, and I will not answer it."
Follow through, gently reminding her of your conversation when she slips up. Also, you many want to put a limit on the number of times she calls/visits. Enforce those limits, too; say, "I'm sorry, but I have to go. As you know, I agreed to talk to you for 10 minutes, and that time is up now." If she shows up at your house, tell her, "Sorry, but we were just leaving." Then do so, even if you only drive around the block!
Of course, your spouse will need to support you in this and maintain the boundaries, too.
Good luck!
Dr. Barb Lesniak, http://www.bnlifeskills.com
Move!! And do not tell where you are moving to.LoL!! Ummm , there really isn't anything to do , unles you can get your husband or yourself to talk to her.
Tell you and your family are fine. Then ask her about her circumstances. I'll bet see is really worried about herself not you. It's just coming out that way.
I have that same problem. Acutally, I HAD that same problem. I moved two hours away, but she still came for a while in the beginning. However, I started to make her feel unwelcomed in my house, and now she is not involved in our lives. Plus it's too far for her to travel all the time.
i think you should just be grateful that you have a mother in law that is nice and well meaning and truely cares,but in return your talking about her behind her back, your the one that said that she's nice and why would she care about your friends? you need to lighten up and count your blessings that you have a "so nice mother in law" others don't .
I have to agree with sweet qt.. I could not have said it any better! great answer!!
You do not owe your mother-in-law an explanation about anything. Unless you want her to know something do not tell her anything. Your husband needs to step in and back you up on this. If she starts in, change the subject and do not discuss anything with her that you do not wish her to know. She may be nice but she is way too nosy.
i agree with sweet qt and dixierock it's not about owing her an explanation she's trying to let you know that she's there for you no matter what you need whether if it's help with food or just somebody to talk to, if you don't want that then let her know , you said she's a so nice mother in law , your upset because she's asking you if you have anything to eat? did something bad happen on the trip? omg..will you get over yourself, if you do move and take the grandkids far from her, i hope you and husband will never get into a situation where you need her if somebody gets injured or fired or something like that coz even though you have a "so nice mother" in law she got a "so nasty daughter in law"
"If you dont like our law go back to ur countery!" Do you really ,guys,believe this is a healthy response ?
Answers:
To Sweet: That is a pretty simplistic response. I guess you don't like situations that make you think.
We need to look at the underlying reasons for statements like that. The last time I checked we still had freedom of speech, and assembly here in the US. No its not healthy to cry love it or leave it. It never was. What if this iS my country and the law is unjust? Slavery and segregation used to be legal. Those laws were changed.
yes if you have a choice stop complaining about somewhere if no one is forcing you to be there
Yes. If I visit your home and the rule is "No spitting on the floor", I should obey that rule or leave. Complaining about it is not a cool thing to do.
The response could of been answered with empathy and understanding. Adaptation to another country and/or state with different laws is hard to live with for some people.
Yes!
Yes, If you don't like the country, vote, leave or shut up.
It's a free country. If someone doesn't agree with a law they have the right to say something,whether or not they are
a citizen.
Yes, to some extent. I believe that years ago people made the hard journey to America to share in our freedom and opportunities. Today, I believe many, not all, but many, come here to take advantage of our generosity and to exploit our system. Like the other person said, when you are in someone else鈥檚 house you respect their rules. Today, many do not even bother to learn the English language. Once they become a naturalized citizen then they can exercise their full rights. But until then, if you do not like my house and my rules 鈥?get out. As far as those who are citizens, utilize your freedom of speech, but don鈥檛 tear down our country and be disloyal. Speak and take action in a constructive manner.
Yes, as long as you spell it correctly.
I dont know if its "healthy" or not but I rather like the response.
I wouldnt move to a country where I disagreed with their laws. If people dont like this great country they should leave and go back to their own country.
"He is demon-possessed and raving mad. Why listen to him?" John 10:20?
John 12:47-"'And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.'"
Allot of people thought Jesus was demon possessed. This makes sense because when I tell people about peace, love, liberty and freedom they stab me in the back, gossip and say I’m evil.
Why does most Christian Churches do the exact opposite of Jesus? They judge sinners and teach God’s blessings to their own kind. What is the difference between the "teachers of the law or Pharisees” and Christians of our time?
Answers:
You have a good point.
They judge sinners and teach God’s blessings to their own kind.
Thats why you need to find a church that believes in the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
No that is falsification of the text of John 10:20
God is Judge.
Eze 2:7 And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.
Eze 3:18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Many people do not act on what they teach but that is not a reason to leave any Church.
The difference is huge.
Christians of our time are blessed to have "accepted Jesus as saviour" the pharisees did not.
People will always be imperfect.
You will find perfection in HEAVEN AND GOD ONLY%26lt;
I'm not sure that they believed He was demon possessed. I am sure that they were jealous and looking for any way to make Him look bad to the people. He was a threat to their way of life. To their position in life. It was the Pharisees who leveled this accusation against Jesus.
Sometimes we are uncomfortably like the Pharisees, which I believe is one of the reasons we are told so much about Jesus' encounters with them. They had become so obsessed with being "right" that they overlooked being righteous.
Some people use this idea to say that anyone who is careful about doing what the Bible says is like the Pharisees, but I don't think that's true. Jesus followed the Law. What He didn't follow was the traditions of the elders. (Matthew 15:1-9) Those traditions probably started out as a good thing. They were so concerned with keeping God's law that they built traditions or "fences" around the law to keep them from even getting close to breaking a law of God.
But their fences didn't keep them safe. They began trusting in the fences more than they trusted in God. The upheld their traditions and disregarded people. And, of course, we can still do that today.
True Christians teach only what the Bible says, unlike the Pharisees, who taught their own ideas and traditions as though they were law. And we do not judge sinners. God has passed the judgment, and has told us how to live. We are simply trying to convince others to be Christians and follow Christ, because it's the only way to be saved.
Allot of people thought Jesus was demon possessed. This makes sense because when I tell people about peace, love, liberty and freedom they stab me in the back, gossip and say I’m evil.
Why does most Christian Churches do the exact opposite of Jesus? They judge sinners and teach God’s blessings to their own kind. What is the difference between the "teachers of the law or Pharisees” and Christians of our time?
Answers:
You have a good point.
They judge sinners and teach God’s blessings to their own kind.
Thats why you need to find a church that believes in the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
No that is falsification of the text of John 10:20
God is Judge.
Eze 2:7 And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.
Eze 3:18 When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Many people do not act on what they teach but that is not a reason to leave any Church.
The difference is huge.
Christians of our time are blessed to have "accepted Jesus as saviour" the pharisees did not.
People will always be imperfect.
You will find perfection in HEAVEN AND GOD ONLY%26lt;
I'm not sure that they believed He was demon possessed. I am sure that they were jealous and looking for any way to make Him look bad to the people. He was a threat to their way of life. To their position in life. It was the Pharisees who leveled this accusation against Jesus.
Sometimes we are uncomfortably like the Pharisees, which I believe is one of the reasons we are told so much about Jesus' encounters with them. They had become so obsessed with being "right" that they overlooked being righteous.
Some people use this idea to say that anyone who is careful about doing what the Bible says is like the Pharisees, but I don't think that's true. Jesus followed the Law. What He didn't follow was the traditions of the elders. (Matthew 15:1-9) Those traditions probably started out as a good thing. They were so concerned with keeping God's law that they built traditions or "fences" around the law to keep them from even getting close to breaking a law of God.
But their fences didn't keep them safe. They began trusting in the fences more than they trusted in God. The upheld their traditions and disregarded people. And, of course, we can still do that today.
True Christians teach only what the Bible says, unlike the Pharisees, who taught their own ideas and traditions as though they were law. And we do not judge sinners. God has passed the judgment, and has told us how to live. We are simply trying to convince others to be Christians and follow Christ, because it's the only way to be saved.
"Have you ever noticed that if you rearranged the letters in mother in law, they come out to Woman Hitler?"
Does anyone else have any unusual anagrams?
Answers:
Elvis = Lives
Listen = Silent
The Morse Code = Here Come Dots
Eleven plus two = Twelve plus one
Software = Swear Oft
Snooze Alarms = Alas! No More Z's
Funeral = Real Fun
The best things in life are free = Nail-biting refreshes the feet
Heavy Rain = Hire a navy
A Decimal Point = I'm a dot in place
Late night Chinese food party = Heating the crispy noodle fat
Til鈥?death do us part = outlandish duet trap
A shoplifter = has to pilfer
Astronomers = Moon starers
Flamethrower = Oh, felt warmer
The meaning of life = The fine game of nil
The earthquakes = That queer shake
Princess Diana = End is a car spin :'{
United States of America = Dine out, taste a Mac, fries
"That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind." 鈥擭eil Armstrong = A thin man ran; makes large stride, left planet, pins flag on moon. On to Mars!
A technical favorite [if you've seen the movie!]
October Sky = Rocket Boys
lol wow never noticed that!
LMAO!! Now it all makes sense!
veryy brainy
santa and satan
devil lived
i always hated santa...
DORMITORY -%26gt; DIRTY ROOM
ASTRONOMER -%26gt; MOON STARER
DESPERATION -%26gt; A HOPE ENDS IT
GEORGE BUSH -%26gt; HE BUGS GORE
THE MORSE CODE -%26gt; HERE COME DOTS
SLOT MACHINES -%26gt; CASH LOST IN ME
PRESIDENT CLINTON OF THE USA -%26gt; TO COPULATE HE FINDS INTERNS
So beware one day u will also become that
n all gals are excited to know that why :-)
here are some more...have fun!!
Santa -%26gt; Satan.
United -%26gt; untied.
Funeral -%26gt; real fun!
Forty five -%26gt; over fifty.
Militarism -%26gt; I limit arms.
Saintliness -%26gt; entails sins.
Antagonist -%26gt; not against.
Evangelists -%26gt; evil's agents.
Within earshot -%26gt; I won't hear this.
Sweltering heat -%26gt; the winter gales.
The Oscar Nominations -%26gt; It's not a cinema honor.
seriously! ur a genious!
way to go!! gah and some of the ones above me are really good too!
What a classical and historical prescription. You seems to be a victim of "Her(r) Hitler" like me. My wife is now normal and very friendly to me. Thank you very much.
Answers:
Elvis = Lives
Listen = Silent
The Morse Code = Here Come Dots
Eleven plus two = Twelve plus one
Software = Swear Oft
Snooze Alarms = Alas! No More Z's
Funeral = Real Fun
The best things in life are free = Nail-biting refreshes the feet
Heavy Rain = Hire a navy
A Decimal Point = I'm a dot in place
Late night Chinese food party = Heating the crispy noodle fat
Til鈥?death do us part = outlandish duet trap
A shoplifter = has to pilfer
Astronomers = Moon starers
Flamethrower = Oh, felt warmer
The meaning of life = The fine game of nil
The earthquakes = That queer shake
Princess Diana = End is a car spin :'{
United States of America = Dine out, taste a Mac, fries
"That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind." 鈥擭eil Armstrong = A thin man ran; makes large stride, left planet, pins flag on moon. On to Mars!
A technical favorite [if you've seen the movie!]
October Sky = Rocket Boys
lol wow never noticed that!
LMAO!! Now it all makes sense!
veryy brainy
santa and satan
devil lived
i always hated santa...
DORMITORY -%26gt; DIRTY ROOM
ASTRONOMER -%26gt; MOON STARER
DESPERATION -%26gt; A HOPE ENDS IT
GEORGE BUSH -%26gt; HE BUGS GORE
THE MORSE CODE -%26gt; HERE COME DOTS
SLOT MACHINES -%26gt; CASH LOST IN ME
PRESIDENT CLINTON OF THE USA -%26gt; TO COPULATE HE FINDS INTERNS
So beware one day u will also become that
n all gals are excited to know that why :-)
here are some more...have fun!!
Santa -%26gt; Satan.
United -%26gt; untied.
Funeral -%26gt; real fun!
Forty five -%26gt; over fifty.
Militarism -%26gt; I limit arms.
Saintliness -%26gt; entails sins.
Antagonist -%26gt; not against.
Evangelists -%26gt; evil's agents.
Within earshot -%26gt; I won't hear this.
Sweltering heat -%26gt; the winter gales.
The Oscar Nominations -%26gt; It's not a cinema honor.
seriously! ur a genious!
way to go!! gah and some of the ones above me are really good too!
What a classical and historical prescription. You seems to be a victim of "Her(r) Hitler" like me. My wife is now normal and very friendly to me. Thank you very much.
"Cursed EVERYONE that hangeth on a (dead) tree"... by the curse of the law.?
If we thus judge one died for all, then were all dead.
Isn't it time that we all dumped sacrifice, for mercy?
Answers:
You said it Donald! Give him the 10 points!
No, but it time for you to either post something that makes sense or else shut the hell up.
Ok.. we can start with the collection plate that comes at us 3 x a week......once on wednesday and twice on sunday....
Are you paraphrasing, cause I don't get what you are trying to say?
I'm sorry I don't get this question
"I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."--God, as quoted by Exodus 33:19 (NIV)
God says in the Word, that our obedience is worth more than our sacrifice. Also, it says in Romans, that we are all alive in Him, and that we as believers need to bring our minds and bodies in line with that new life.
eh?
Sorry, but you are confusing... I am not sure what your question is...
why who what wich i cant understand please help me
Isn't it time that we all dumped sacrifice, for mercy?
Answers:
You said it Donald! Give him the 10 points!
No, but it time for you to either post something that makes sense or else shut the hell up.
Ok.. we can start with the collection plate that comes at us 3 x a week......once on wednesday and twice on sunday....
Are you paraphrasing, cause I don't get what you are trying to say?
I'm sorry I don't get this question
"I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."--God, as quoted by Exodus 33:19 (NIV)
God says in the Word, that our obedience is worth more than our sacrifice. Also, it says in Romans, that we are all alive in Him, and that we as believers need to bring our minds and bodies in line with that new life.
eh?
Sorry, but you are confusing... I am not sure what your question is...
why who what wich i cant understand please help me
$200 pet fee for allowing pets in an apartment legal?
A friend and I are getting ready to sign a lease on an apartment and when we asked about pets, they said they charge a one time fee of $200. When I asked what the fee went toward they said, "so you can have a pet." I said, "no, what does the fee go toward," to which I got the same reply. They also charge you extra for any pet damage done.
My question is, is it legal to charge someone a fee for a pet just because they can even though they are not using the money for anything? (It is not returned if there is no damage)
Thanks
Answers:
It all depends on who you're renting from. I would not pay a pet fee without seeing everything in writing. Yes, they do charge that and even more for pet fees. Do you have to pay a non-refundable deposit for you and your friend? Make sure it's all in writing.
Yep. I have had to pay it for my cats, plus there is usually a $30+ extra put onto your monthly rent for a pet as well.
Yes. It is legal.
Most hotels charge extra fees, when you bring a pet, even if you leave the room cleaner then when you arrived.
They use the money to cover the extra cleaning and pet odor removal, which is above and beyond any damage that the pet may have done.
I had a hamster that got out and ate a piece of carpet, a cat that scaled the drapes and shredded a couch, and a dog that chewed and scratched the door...so they do some damage even if they are usually perfect.
The property owner can set any fees for whatever they deem necassary. They are the OWNER you are the tenent. You either go by their rules or find another place to live. Just because the charge you a "pet fee" they could have just as eaisly charged you a $200 non-refundable facility fee or something else. Just deal with it or look for another place to live.
In Liberty,
Eric H. Smith
www.erichsmith.com
Yes they can charge even more then that they hold it along with the security deposit in case the pet causes damage to walls,carpet,or wood say if the pet causes damage to carpet they can demand it to be replaced and the cost comes out of that fee
How many pets they are allowing you to have, any weight limits for pets (single or combined),fees associated with allowing pets and fees in case of damage (in addition to the security deposit you are giving) should be explicitly written in the lease. If the lease does not have these then make sure you get them added so that there is no misunderstandings in the future. The only times I had to pay for my critters was when I was renting an apartment or condo. Yes, unfortunately this is legal.
My question is, is it legal to charge someone a fee for a pet just because they can even though they are not using the money for anything? (It is not returned if there is no damage)
Thanks
Answers:
It all depends on who you're renting from. I would not pay a pet fee without seeing everything in writing. Yes, they do charge that and even more for pet fees. Do you have to pay a non-refundable deposit for you and your friend? Make sure it's all in writing.
Yep. I have had to pay it for my cats, plus there is usually a $30+ extra put onto your monthly rent for a pet as well.
Yes. It is legal.
Most hotels charge extra fees, when you bring a pet, even if you leave the room cleaner then when you arrived.
They use the money to cover the extra cleaning and pet odor removal, which is above and beyond any damage that the pet may have done.
I had a hamster that got out and ate a piece of carpet, a cat that scaled the drapes and shredded a couch, and a dog that chewed and scratched the door...so they do some damage even if they are usually perfect.
The property owner can set any fees for whatever they deem necassary. They are the OWNER you are the tenent. You either go by their rules or find another place to live. Just because the charge you a "pet fee" they could have just as eaisly charged you a $200 non-refundable facility fee or something else. Just deal with it or look for another place to live.
In Liberty,
Eric H. Smith
www.erichsmith.com
Yes they can charge even more then that they hold it along with the security deposit in case the pet causes damage to walls,carpet,or wood say if the pet causes damage to carpet they can demand it to be replaced and the cost comes out of that fee
How many pets they are allowing you to have, any weight limits for pets (single or combined),fees associated with allowing pets and fees in case of damage (in addition to the security deposit you are giving) should be explicitly written in the lease. If the lease does not have these then make sure you get them added so that there is no misunderstandings in the future. The only times I had to pay for my critters was when I was renting an apartment or condo. Yes, unfortunately this is legal.
!answer this!?
okay im mexican and i want to kno what you think about that dumb sh!t of a law they want to make......you kno about immigrants with out papers could be deported to where ever they came what do u think about that personally i think its stup!d
Answers:
it's a great idea!!
http://ailf.org/ipc/fairdistortion.asp
http://humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=13889
WONDERFUL IDEA! I am not going to list all the reason why. If you want to know them check out my answers/questions.
They never really use to have immigration laws that mattered much. All these issues are really coming up because of 9/11 and that's the bottome line.
I never understood why Mexico is considered a separate country and geographically, it is still attached to the United States? I feel sorry because American forefathers that made the laws for America was not originally from this country and they and their families were not asked to have papers to stay in this country.
There are a lot of people that actually waited a very long time to legally come to the U.S. from Mexico. These people have been working hard, paying all taxes, and should be annoyed at the Mexicans that just jumped over the wall.
The illegal immigrants, like it or not, drive down the wages of those who come here legally. Illegal immigration perpetuates poverty.
I think it's bad. Very very bad. I think there is a better way of dealing with this issue. I am a white person; and I am very mad when stunts like this are pulled against other races.
Really, if they wanted to make the process a real step in the right direction they wouldnt be scaring all these immigrants with talk of deportation. If I were an immigrant and they told me "register with us so in two years we can find you and deport you" I think I would choose to remain illegal.
Illegals committed a crime and continue to do so when here. DEPORT THEM ALL!
http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_197114603.html
DON'T GET ME WRONG. I KNOW MANY HARDWORKING PEOPLE FROM OTHER PLACES COME HERE TO BETTER THEIR LIVES. BUT I THINK THEY SHOULD BE TRACEABLE AND HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEMSELVES. CALIFORNIA IS GOING TO BE SO OVERRUN BY TOO MANY PEOPLE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BECOME TOTALLY BROKE TRYING TO HELP THEM MAKE A BETTER LIFE. WE CAN ONLY HELP SO MANY. IF YOU ARE HERE ILLEGALLY YOU CAN STILL GET GOVERNMENT MONEY, FOOD, CLOTHING AND MANY OTHER PERKS. I'VE BEEN HERE ALL MY LIFE AND EVEN THOUGH MY INCOME HAS BEEN LOW MY CHILDREN WERE NEVER ELIGIBLE FOR ANY FREE GOVERNMENT PERKS AND THEY DIDN'T GET ANY HELP WITH COLLEGE FEES. THAT CAN BE A LITTLE AGGRAVATING. I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE SHOULD DO BUT THERE ARE MANY SIDES TO THE SITUATION. I SAW A COLLEGE GROUP FLYING THE MEXICAN FLAG AT THE TOP OF THE POLE WITH THE UNITED STATES FLAG UNDERNEATH AND UPSIDE DOWN. THAT IS SO DISRESPECTABLE. SEEING THAT MAKES ME THINK THEY SHOULD GO BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO AT LEAST APPRECIATE AND RESPECT WHAT IS OFFERED TO HELP THEM.
GOOD IDEA !! If you are not hear legally you do not belong hear! Do you know what the word legal and illegal means?? that is not so hard to understand now is it
i think its stupid too, because if people dont get a proper visa dont have as many chances... damn! its hard to get a good job or better chances for a better life in some countries and people try living in other countries because of their situation but embassys and other institutions dont grant visas! so people have to either stay or be illegal
So much hate, so much pride, so much selfishness, RISE BABYLON from the ashes.
Ever since 9/11 the government has been somewhat protecting the boarders. If you happen to forget the hijackers came though Canada. Now most of the terrious is coming thought the Mexico boarders. Should that be OK that people from another country can sneak over hear and bomb us. We should never let our guard down. We already did once and look what happen.
That is the law now. I'm for everybody obeying the law and if it's broken there are consequences that should be handed out
I thinks it's more stupid for you to be so uneducated.
I THINK IT IS A GREAT IDEA!!
Answers:
it's a great idea!!
http://ailf.org/ipc/fairdistortion.asp
http://humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=13889
WONDERFUL IDEA! I am not going to list all the reason why. If you want to know them check out my answers/questions.
They never really use to have immigration laws that mattered much. All these issues are really coming up because of 9/11 and that's the bottome line.
I never understood why Mexico is considered a separate country and geographically, it is still attached to the United States? I feel sorry because American forefathers that made the laws for America was not originally from this country and they and their families were not asked to have papers to stay in this country.
There are a lot of people that actually waited a very long time to legally come to the U.S. from Mexico. These people have been working hard, paying all taxes, and should be annoyed at the Mexicans that just jumped over the wall.
The illegal immigrants, like it or not, drive down the wages of those who come here legally. Illegal immigration perpetuates poverty.
I think it's bad. Very very bad. I think there is a better way of dealing with this issue. I am a white person; and I am very mad when stunts like this are pulled against other races.
Really, if they wanted to make the process a real step in the right direction they wouldnt be scaring all these immigrants with talk of deportation. If I were an immigrant and they told me "register with us so in two years we can find you and deport you" I think I would choose to remain illegal.
Illegals committed a crime and continue to do so when here. DEPORT THEM ALL!
http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_197114603.html
DON'T GET ME WRONG. I KNOW MANY HARDWORKING PEOPLE FROM OTHER PLACES COME HERE TO BETTER THEIR LIVES. BUT I THINK THEY SHOULD BE TRACEABLE AND HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEMSELVES. CALIFORNIA IS GOING TO BE SO OVERRUN BY TOO MANY PEOPLE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BECOME TOTALLY BROKE TRYING TO HELP THEM MAKE A BETTER LIFE. WE CAN ONLY HELP SO MANY. IF YOU ARE HERE ILLEGALLY YOU CAN STILL GET GOVERNMENT MONEY, FOOD, CLOTHING AND MANY OTHER PERKS. I'VE BEEN HERE ALL MY LIFE AND EVEN THOUGH MY INCOME HAS BEEN LOW MY CHILDREN WERE NEVER ELIGIBLE FOR ANY FREE GOVERNMENT PERKS AND THEY DIDN'T GET ANY HELP WITH COLLEGE FEES. THAT CAN BE A LITTLE AGGRAVATING. I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE SHOULD DO BUT THERE ARE MANY SIDES TO THE SITUATION. I SAW A COLLEGE GROUP FLYING THE MEXICAN FLAG AT THE TOP OF THE POLE WITH THE UNITED STATES FLAG UNDERNEATH AND UPSIDE DOWN. THAT IS SO DISRESPECTABLE. SEEING THAT MAKES ME THINK THEY SHOULD GO BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO AT LEAST APPRECIATE AND RESPECT WHAT IS OFFERED TO HELP THEM.
GOOD IDEA !! If you are not hear legally you do not belong hear! Do you know what the word legal and illegal means?? that is not so hard to understand now is it
i think its stupid too, because if people dont get a proper visa dont have as many chances... damn! its hard to get a good job or better chances for a better life in some countries and people try living in other countries because of their situation but embassys and other institutions dont grant visas! so people have to either stay or be illegal
So much hate, so much pride, so much selfishness, RISE BABYLON from the ashes.
Ever since 9/11 the government has been somewhat protecting the boarders. If you happen to forget the hijackers came though Canada. Now most of the terrious is coming thought the Mexico boarders. Should that be OK that people from another country can sneak over hear and bomb us. We should never let our guard down. We already did once and look what happen.
That is the law now. I'm for everybody obeying the law and if it's broken there are consequences that should be handed out
I thinks it's more stupid for you to be so uneducated.
I THINK IT IS A GREAT IDEA!!
鈾櫕 If I cross the views of the PRESIDENT of my Country........?
........ in either verbal or written arguments,
or by in whatsoever manners given by
in the freedom of the speech,
will I be condemned as a Criminal of my country
................................. for my such acts ???
Answer:
Hi,
Your nick name leads us towards -Hate =Naffrat.(Urdu)
you can have right of different opinion only if you are a resident of a democratic nation like India,US etc but keep your words polite and decent.do not try to make a threat or abuse.
No you will have opposing views...but unlike the MUZZIE SCUM..we do not execute for a difference of opinion
Nothing will happen. Everybody have the right to speak. if you are a citizen of Iraq and Saddam Hussien is the president, then you might loose your head. But now, no problem. Feel free to express your views. Go ahead, all the best to you. http://online-recruiting.blogspot.com/... .
You Can always speak as freedom of speech is our birth right, but have to check that the words you use are not derogatory or unparliamentry., as far as I know our President loves healthy discussions and debates.
When I cross the views of the President of my family, my wife, she shouts, beats me, condemn me as a criminal, harrasser. If possible she can kill me or put me in jail.
We, husbands, have to obey Rashtripati.
If you have different views, you can express after using helmet.
No, this is a democracy, u can say anything in a CIVILISED MANNER
This depends on the country you belong to. India is a democratic country and one can express his views without hurting public morality. But you will be arrested if you are from so called democracies headed by dictators and military rulers.
if ur views hurt the sentiment of some religion or are likely to cause violence ur likely to be condemned as criminal
or by in whatsoever manners given by
in the freedom of the speech,
will I be condemned as a Criminal of my country
................................. for my such acts ???
Answer:
Hi,
Your nick name leads us towards -Hate =Naffrat.(Urdu)
you can have right of different opinion only if you are a resident of a democratic nation like India,US etc but keep your words polite and decent.do not try to make a threat or abuse.
No you will have opposing views...but unlike the MUZZIE SCUM..we do not execute for a difference of opinion
Nothing will happen. Everybody have the right to speak. if you are a citizen of Iraq and Saddam Hussien is the president, then you might loose your head. But now, no problem. Feel free to express your views. Go ahead, all the best to you. http://online-recruiting.blogspot.com/... .
You Can always speak as freedom of speech is our birth right, but have to check that the words you use are not derogatory or unparliamentry., as far as I know our President loves healthy discussions and debates.
When I cross the views of the President of my family, my wife, she shouts, beats me, condemn me as a criminal, harrasser. If possible she can kill me or put me in jail.
We, husbands, have to obey Rashtripati.
If you have different views, you can express after using helmet.
No, this is a democracy, u can say anything in a CIVILISED MANNER
This depends on the country you belong to. India is a democratic country and one can express his views without hurting public morality. But you will be arrested if you are from so called democracies headed by dictators and military rulers.
if ur views hurt the sentiment of some religion or are likely to cause violence ur likely to be condemned as criminal
驴Wuold you consider suicide?
驴Is it really something bad at all or is it a good solution to all problems? Imagine you had a lot of problems.
Answer:
A solution means that your problem has been fixed. Suicide is not a solution, its an end to everything. Alot of people are happy these days after going through alot of problems. They found solutions to their problems that would allow them to enjoy the rest of their lives.
Maybe you should seek help for each problem instead of nuking them all at one time with a solution that wont help you and one that will add alot of grieving to those close to you. If you are on a computer and have internet, you arent doing to bad, I would start from there and move forward.
It doesn't solve anything. There may be problems, but no problems are bad enough to kill yourself, because ALL problems go away with time. I would go see a counselor.
See a doctor. No , My train of thought is my enemies win if I kill myself and I'm a sore loser. What ever you do, don;t visit a school.
Alot of muslim suicide bombers do, I dont ,I have a life and self esteeem. Jesus is King.
If I found myself to be a danger to others, yes, I'd do it.
For my own sake, no.
No
What type of problems,and it is stupid and wrong to end anyone's life including yours for any reason
No, I sould not consider suicide. It is a coward's way out.
Think of the people that you leave behind - the people that are close to you like family and friends. It certainly is not a solution to problems, the problems are still there only for others to solve. If you think you are going to commit suicide
please talk to a counselor or someone before you consider something stupid as suicide. It solves nothing!!
nOOOOhh!
I found people that do it to be strong actually rather than week.It takes a lot of guts to do it.Personally - no,I will not do it because I am a mother and because I have people that love me but I do admit that it has passed thru my mind a few times
There are always better alternatives to suicide.
If you do not like the job you have leave it for something else, If you do not like where you live move far away to some other place and start anew,
if you are having a hard time with the people around you move away from them and meet new people, etc...
Never take the problems out on yourself, because in the end the only one hurt by those problems will be you, and everyone and everything will still go on without you.
so don't be stupid and do not let the problems in your life win over you, so do not hurt yourself.
Thinks are incapable of getting better when you are dead. So no. I wouldn't consider it.
That said, most people who commit suicide have severe mental illnesses, so it is easy for all of us to get on here and say we wouldn't do it. The fact that suicide doesn't solve anything and things can always get better doesn't mean much to someone who is having delusions or depression so severe that they can't be rational. That is why it is so important to manage your depression, if you have it, and to look out for friends and family who may have emotional problems. Someone you know might need help!
Suicide is a wrong answer for everything. It just places all the problems on everyone else instead of you. Everyone has problem and everyone has someone whose problems are ten times worse. Sadly enough on my worst days I often find myself thinking "Hey I got food to eat, water to drink and , well semi, clean air to breathe. I could be starving and living in a dump somewhere." Then that makes me feel better.
~Not that im implying that your thinking of suicide its just how i cope with stress~
Probabily YES if i am a crazy killer going to university campus and off shooting other people
yes if I was mentally ill , mainly because I'm not afraid to die and because my stepbrother was severly mentally ill and he commited suicide and I honestly dont know why , but if I was him I would know what went on in his head .
A LONG time ago- during a particularly ROUGH time in my life- I seriously considered it. But JUST as I was about to go through with it- I got MAD. "The HECK with it" -I thought. "I'm not going "down" like a dog...-I'm going down in flames, %26 I'm gonna do it- MY way..." And I did. I stopped doing things the way I was "supposed to"- and started doing things the way I WANTED to. Sure- there were lots of "consequences" I had to deal with- but I accepted those as part of the "deal"- %26 made NO excuses for my actions. 30+ years later- I'm STILL living my life MY way...- %26 I'm one of the happiest people I know ... :)
It's a permanent solution for temporary problems. What if you killed yourself and then the next day, all of those problems changed or got better. You won't be there to experience that if you are dead.
And think of all of the hurt people you would leave behind you!
Answer:
A solution means that your problem has been fixed. Suicide is not a solution, its an end to everything. Alot of people are happy these days after going through alot of problems. They found solutions to their problems that would allow them to enjoy the rest of their lives.
Maybe you should seek help for each problem instead of nuking them all at one time with a solution that wont help you and one that will add alot of grieving to those close to you. If you are on a computer and have internet, you arent doing to bad, I would start from there and move forward.
It doesn't solve anything. There may be problems, but no problems are bad enough to kill yourself, because ALL problems go away with time. I would go see a counselor.
See a doctor. No , My train of thought is my enemies win if I kill myself and I'm a sore loser. What ever you do, don;t visit a school.
Alot of muslim suicide bombers do, I dont ,I have a life and self esteeem. Jesus is King.
If I found myself to be a danger to others, yes, I'd do it.
For my own sake, no.
No
What type of problems,and it is stupid and wrong to end anyone's life including yours for any reason
No, I sould not consider suicide. It is a coward's way out.
Think of the people that you leave behind - the people that are close to you like family and friends. It certainly is not a solution to problems, the problems are still there only for others to solve. If you think you are going to commit suicide
please talk to a counselor or someone before you consider something stupid as suicide. It solves nothing!!
nOOOOhh!
I found people that do it to be strong actually rather than week.It takes a lot of guts to do it.Personally - no,I will not do it because I am a mother and because I have people that love me but I do admit that it has passed thru my mind a few times
There are always better alternatives to suicide.
If you do not like the job you have leave it for something else, If you do not like where you live move far away to some other place and start anew,
if you are having a hard time with the people around you move away from them and meet new people, etc...
Never take the problems out on yourself, because in the end the only one hurt by those problems will be you, and everyone and everything will still go on without you.
so don't be stupid and do not let the problems in your life win over you, so do not hurt yourself.
Thinks are incapable of getting better when you are dead. So no. I wouldn't consider it.
That said, most people who commit suicide have severe mental illnesses, so it is easy for all of us to get on here and say we wouldn't do it. The fact that suicide doesn't solve anything and things can always get better doesn't mean much to someone who is having delusions or depression so severe that they can't be rational. That is why it is so important to manage your depression, if you have it, and to look out for friends and family who may have emotional problems. Someone you know might need help!
Suicide is a wrong answer for everything. It just places all the problems on everyone else instead of you. Everyone has problem and everyone has someone whose problems are ten times worse. Sadly enough on my worst days I often find myself thinking "Hey I got food to eat, water to drink and , well semi, clean air to breathe. I could be starving and living in a dump somewhere." Then that makes me feel better.
~Not that im implying that your thinking of suicide its just how i cope with stress~
Probabily YES if i am a crazy killer going to university campus and off shooting other people
yes if I was mentally ill , mainly because I'm not afraid to die and because my stepbrother was severly mentally ill and he commited suicide and I honestly dont know why , but if I was him I would know what went on in his head .
A LONG time ago- during a particularly ROUGH time in my life- I seriously considered it. But JUST as I was about to go through with it- I got MAD. "The HECK with it" -I thought. "I'm not going "down" like a dog...-I'm going down in flames, %26 I'm gonna do it- MY way..." And I did. I stopped doing things the way I was "supposed to"- and started doing things the way I WANTED to. Sure- there were lots of "consequences" I had to deal with- but I accepted those as part of the "deal"- %26 made NO excuses for my actions. 30+ years later- I'm STILL living my life MY way...- %26 I'm one of the happiest people I know ... :)
It's a permanent solution for temporary problems. What if you killed yourself and then the next day, all of those problems changed or got better. You won't be there to experience that if you are dead.
And think of all of the hurt people you would leave behind you!
You're writing a legal brief that asks Supreme Court to review Circuit Court's decision..you'll petition for?
Question: You're writing a legal brief that asks the supreme court to review the decision of a circuit court, which you believe has made a decision conflicting with federal precedent. In this brief, you'll petition for a...
A. writ of prohibition
B. writ of habeas corpus
C. writ of certiorari
D. writ of rescission
Answer:
C
(c) Certiorari. That's the definition of the "discretionary review" that you ask for from SCOTUS. It essentially means a writ to transfer the record and files from the lower court to the Supreme Court.
c
A. writ of prohibition
B. writ of habeas corpus
C. writ of certiorari
D. writ of rescission
Answer:
C
(c) Certiorari. That's the definition of the "discretionary review" that you ask for from SCOTUS. It essentially means a writ to transfer the record and files from the lower court to the Supreme Court.
c
Your take: Should we legalize murder if there are extenuating circumstances?
In this instance; the pemanent cure for all telemarketers.
Answer:
Yes. We keep having problems with pedophiles who've been released after serving their terms, and then repeat their offenses. I'm pretty sure society would save itself a lot, if we just made justifiable homicide for the fathers of the victims.
Telemarkets should go to the same hell as people who chew food while they're talking on the phone.
I think caller ID is more humane solution.
Amy....I think you're onto something! I wouldn't take it that far but understanding your sense of humor... at least using a device on the telephone where you can send a 50k volt of electrical charge to the caller for being a persistant and annoying pissant!
I think doorknobs should have the same accessory where door to door salesmen can get their fill of electroshock therapy!
I may just hire Macaulay Culkin to boobytrap my house like in Home Alone!
no.
I hate telemarketers but I guess they have to gey paid too. LOL that was funny but people would definitly take agvantage. Like people in Houston that can't drive in the rain! like it never rains in Houston
Not really, there's no good reason for taking someone else's life away, unless it's revenge for a murdered love one or if they get the death penalty, (although, that's not really murder). Also in the case of telemarketers....go for it! (lol...)
Boy do I have a list I would like to include in this. Remember if it is legal it is not murder.
You mean like I cant stand a neighbor and she is a big inconvenience to me so I should be able to take her out - no really, she would be better off dead anyway........right?
look up under search for your states "no call list" once you put your phone number on list it takes about a month and you will be done with the tela want to be's. It really does work and if by chance a persistent no speaky english hybrid wants to keep calling you go back to the site and file a complaint.
The only reason I didn't say yes shoot them is because once the telmarketers are thinned down what would be next on the list to hunt out. Rude drivers, old people, etc...
Or, you could just be an adult and answer the phone and tell them not to call you anymore if you aren't interested in what they have to offer. They are legally obligated to comply.
The thing that gets me about people who whine about telemarketers is that they don't seem to whine about TV commercials.... yet they accomplish the same thing. Don't like your phone ringing? Turn the ringer off. Don't want to talk to a telemarketer? Ask them not to call anymore.
No! They are a major source of amusement:
The deaf guy scenario: You just keep asking them to speak up; and you 'misunderstand' what they've said "So the credit card is free and you don't have to pay the money back?"
The dead guy scenario: When they ask for you by name, you say "who is calling?" and then when they say such and such company, you get all emotional and say "How can you call asking for my father when he's only been dead three days? Don't you know we're in the middle of his funeral here? How heartless can you be?" And then sob.
The idiot scenario: Whatever the telemarketer says, you just say "What are you, an idiot?" and as they persist "Even your mother thinks you're an idiot" and "If you weren't such and idiot, you could get a decent job" - this one can run and run, depending on how insistent/annoyed they get!
There are so many other ways to amuse yourself with a telemarketer. Why would you want to kill them!
Answer:
Yes. We keep having problems with pedophiles who've been released after serving their terms, and then repeat their offenses. I'm pretty sure society would save itself a lot, if we just made justifiable homicide for the fathers of the victims.
Telemarkets should go to the same hell as people who chew food while they're talking on the phone.
I think caller ID is more humane solution.
Amy....I think you're onto something! I wouldn't take it that far but understanding your sense of humor... at least using a device on the telephone where you can send a 50k volt of electrical charge to the caller for being a persistant and annoying pissant!
I think doorknobs should have the same accessory where door to door salesmen can get their fill of electroshock therapy!
I may just hire Macaulay Culkin to boobytrap my house like in Home Alone!
no.
I hate telemarketers but I guess they have to gey paid too. LOL that was funny but people would definitly take agvantage. Like people in Houston that can't drive in the rain! like it never rains in Houston
Not really, there's no good reason for taking someone else's life away, unless it's revenge for a murdered love one or if they get the death penalty, (although, that's not really murder). Also in the case of telemarketers....go for it! (lol...)
Boy do I have a list I would like to include in this. Remember if it is legal it is not murder.
You mean like I cant stand a neighbor and she is a big inconvenience to me so I should be able to take her out - no really, she would be better off dead anyway........right?
look up under search for your states "no call list" once you put your phone number on list it takes about a month and you will be done with the tela want to be's. It really does work and if by chance a persistent no speaky english hybrid wants to keep calling you go back to the site and file a complaint.
The only reason I didn't say yes shoot them is because once the telmarketers are thinned down what would be next on the list to hunt out. Rude drivers, old people, etc...
Or, you could just be an adult and answer the phone and tell them not to call you anymore if you aren't interested in what they have to offer. They are legally obligated to comply.
The thing that gets me about people who whine about telemarketers is that they don't seem to whine about TV commercials.... yet they accomplish the same thing. Don't like your phone ringing? Turn the ringer off. Don't want to talk to a telemarketer? Ask them not to call anymore.
No! They are a major source of amusement:
The deaf guy scenario: You just keep asking them to speak up; and you 'misunderstand' what they've said "So the credit card is free and you don't have to pay the money back?"
The dead guy scenario: When they ask for you by name, you say "who is calling?" and then when they say such and such company, you get all emotional and say "How can you call asking for my father when he's only been dead three days? Don't you know we're in the middle of his funeral here? How heartless can you be?" And then sob.
The idiot scenario: Whatever the telemarketer says, you just say "What are you, an idiot?" and as they persist "Even your mother thinks you're an idiot" and "If you weren't such and idiot, you could get a decent job" - this one can run and run, depending on how insistent/annoyed they get!
There are so many other ways to amuse yourself with a telemarketer. Why would you want to kill them!
Your rights?
Can a company lower your payrate?
Answer:
Yes, they can even fire you for no reason while trying to save profits, its called a layoff. They dont even have to give you notice or compensation. Be lucky you've still got a job.
im sure they could. or maybe ask you to work less hours bc they dont have the money. or just fire you.
Usually yes, unless you are in a unionized business, in which case they can only do so after discussions with the union.
In South Carolina they can. And if you are fired in South Carolina, they can also drop your wages to minimum wage for your last paycheck.
They can do it for future payments, but not ones that you have already earned.
Answer:
Yes, they can even fire you for no reason while trying to save profits, its called a layoff. They dont even have to give you notice or compensation. Be lucky you've still got a job.
im sure they could. or maybe ask you to work less hours bc they dont have the money. or just fire you.
Usually yes, unless you are in a unionized business, in which case they can only do so after discussions with the union.
In South Carolina they can. And if you are fired in South Carolina, they can also drop your wages to minimum wage for your last paycheck.
They can do it for future payments, but not ones that you have already earned.
Your opinion...?
One of the two biggest and most influential political parties in Croatia, SDP, is about to choose its new president, since the old one (Ivica Racan) died a while ago. One of the candidates is Milan Bandic,currently the Mayor of Zagreb, Croatia`s capital. I, personally, dislike him, although he is generally very popular among the people. There is a link below where you can see him PICKING HIS NOSE on the Davis Cup Finals in Slovakia 2005.(we won, btw:) He is the honorable president of the biggest, and of course the wealthiest football club in Croatia, Dinamo. The president of the club, Zdravko Mamic, when asked what he thought of his candidature, answered: Milane, Dinamo is with you heart and soul.
Do you think this is ethical? To speak for the whoule club, I mean?
http://ire.nosf.net/2007/01/28/sto-drugo...
Answer:
It all boils down to who can kiss more ***. The more the better no matter how this person acts in politics. He's just looking out for # 1 and get elected. No etics don't play a role and I don't think it's ethical.
Politics is one hell of a game and the winner sits on top and all others go to the bottom. If the people elect him? Then he deserves the position. But it a tuff place to be.
Do you think this is ethical? To speak for the whoule club, I mean?
http://ire.nosf.net/2007/01/28/sto-drugo...
Answer:
It all boils down to who can kiss more ***. The more the better no matter how this person acts in politics. He's just looking out for # 1 and get elected. No etics don't play a role and I don't think it's ethical.
Politics is one hell of a game and the winner sits on top and all others go to the bottom. If the people elect him? Then he deserves the position. But it a tuff place to be.
Your opinion plz: cannabis should be legalized in Canada?
Can you give your opinion on the above? Give pros AND cons plz, even if you are against please try to think of reason FOR.
Answer:
YEs...because BC bud is amazing!!!! so tasty! j/k. i just heard that's the best.
yes, cannabis should be legalized for a few good reasons:
1 - gov't control of it will regulate the market, thereby taking street drug dealers out of business for good. what will that do? well, right now, there's a consistent battle for dealing territory between dealers. this almost always results in voilence and more often than not, innocent people are caught in it.
2 - people in the cannabis trade will pay taxes on their consumption just like any other product, while right now, it's completely untaxed.
3 - it will help regulate what is being sold as cannabis. sometimes now, you can have something that is laced with dust or any other number of substances - very dangerous.
4 - illegal trafficing will be neutered....at least internally in canada.
5 - revenue savings!!!!!! do you know how much public $$$$ is spent on pot convictions in a year?
there's so many more, but i'm done now.
peace,
g
okay, CON:
1 - it will 'legitimize' marijuana usage for younger people, exactly like what happened with alcohol. it's an abusable substance - and many problems of that nature will happen. many beleive that if you make it legal, people who wouldn't normally think of using it WILL be very comfortable experimenting with it.
2- more along that line, it's often a 'stepping stone' for other drugs. because of its benign nature, younger people assume that if they can handle marijuana, they can handle other things that are much more harmful.
3- it is hard to find if someone is under the influence of Marijuana. (this is a BIG one) for alcohol, there's the breathylizer test. this is very effective in pointing out drivers who are udner the influence on the road. for marijuana, there's nothing, so the occurence of driving while intoxicated (with marijuana) will shoot through the roof.....and as we all know, response time while 'high' on pot is delayed incredibly. that makes driving 'high' terrribly dangerous.
okay...there's your cons. please don't let this one get to vote. pick a best answer!!!!
Who is Canada? Sorry, I'm from Texas
Answer:
YEs...because BC bud is amazing!!!! so tasty! j/k. i just heard that's the best.
yes, cannabis should be legalized for a few good reasons:
1 - gov't control of it will regulate the market, thereby taking street drug dealers out of business for good. what will that do? well, right now, there's a consistent battle for dealing territory between dealers. this almost always results in voilence and more often than not, innocent people are caught in it.
2 - people in the cannabis trade will pay taxes on their consumption just like any other product, while right now, it's completely untaxed.
3 - it will help regulate what is being sold as cannabis. sometimes now, you can have something that is laced with dust or any other number of substances - very dangerous.
4 - illegal trafficing will be neutered....at least internally in canada.
5 - revenue savings!!!!!! do you know how much public $$$$ is spent on pot convictions in a year?
there's so many more, but i'm done now.
peace,
g
okay, CON:
1 - it will 'legitimize' marijuana usage for younger people, exactly like what happened with alcohol. it's an abusable substance - and many problems of that nature will happen. many beleive that if you make it legal, people who wouldn't normally think of using it WILL be very comfortable experimenting with it.
2- more along that line, it's often a 'stepping stone' for other drugs. because of its benign nature, younger people assume that if they can handle marijuana, they can handle other things that are much more harmful.
3- it is hard to find if someone is under the influence of Marijuana. (this is a BIG one) for alcohol, there's the breathylizer test. this is very effective in pointing out drivers who are udner the influence on the road. for marijuana, there's nothing, so the occurence of driving while intoxicated (with marijuana) will shoot through the roof.....and as we all know, response time while 'high' on pot is delayed incredibly. that makes driving 'high' terrribly dangerous.
okay...there's your cons. please don't let this one get to vote. pick a best answer!!!!
Who is Canada? Sorry, I'm from Texas
Your opinion on the Drinking age being 21?
I know it lowers car crashes and DWI. But come on, kids can sign up and go to war, become lagal adults, smoke, and go to prison at 18, but they cant drink. That does not make much sence to me, when you become an legal adult you should be able to make your own choices. Share your opinion on the matter please.
Answer:
yes i know hat you mean i live in canada and its differnt by province but here is sask you cnat vote drink smoke buy porn at 18 drive at 16 and drink at 19 i think it works good only problem is now that in your case they could not just drop the age down to 18 immidialtely it would be a shock on the system in that suddenly youd have a bunch of people between 18-21 goin out and getting smashed and driving home some people run a little too hard with freedom . now in france there is no drinking age and has never relaly been and they dont have a drinking problem because its not a big deal that they can finnaly drink. doing that now would just cuase problems
I think the drinking age should be 65.
Yes it does lower the rate of accidents but I tend to agree with you, if your old enough to vote, go to war, etc. you should be able to go to a bar, however that being said I have absolutely no sympathy for drunk drivers.
My opinion, drinking age should be 21 because....
1. At 18; You can sign up for the military, but you don't just jump into it like Rambo, they train you.
2. At 18; You can smoke, but other than burning down a house, your just hurting yourself.
3. At 18; You can go to prison, because long before you reached this age you should know right from wrong.
4. At 18; Most young adults are still chuckle heads and cant handle their liquor. (IE Girls Gone Wild Videos, and recent concert debacles)
Young adults need time to fully mature , throwing in a mind altering substance just doesn't help things out. As I said its just my opinion.
If you can vote, own a gun, and die for your country; I think you should be able to have a drink as well.
I think either the drinking age should be reduced to 18, or the age of majority (legal adulthood) should be raised to 21 across the board.
It makes little sense to argue that someone is not mature enough to walk into the grocery store and buy a six pack at 18, but that they ARE mature enough to walk into a military recruiter's office and sign away 3 years of their life...possibly to lose it in a war.
Answer:
yes i know hat you mean i live in canada and its differnt by province but here is sask you cnat vote drink smoke buy porn at 18 drive at 16 and drink at 19 i think it works good only problem is now that in your case they could not just drop the age down to 18 immidialtely it would be a shock on the system in that suddenly youd have a bunch of people between 18-21 goin out and getting smashed and driving home some people run a little too hard with freedom . now in france there is no drinking age and has never relaly been and they dont have a drinking problem because its not a big deal that they can finnaly drink. doing that now would just cuase problems
I think the drinking age should be 65.
Yes it does lower the rate of accidents but I tend to agree with you, if your old enough to vote, go to war, etc. you should be able to go to a bar, however that being said I have absolutely no sympathy for drunk drivers.
My opinion, drinking age should be 21 because....
1. At 18; You can sign up for the military, but you don't just jump into it like Rambo, they train you.
2. At 18; You can smoke, but other than burning down a house, your just hurting yourself.
3. At 18; You can go to prison, because long before you reached this age you should know right from wrong.
4. At 18; Most young adults are still chuckle heads and cant handle their liquor. (IE Girls Gone Wild Videos, and recent concert debacles)
Young adults need time to fully mature , throwing in a mind altering substance just doesn't help things out. As I said its just my opinion.
If you can vote, own a gun, and die for your country; I think you should be able to have a drink as well.
I think either the drinking age should be reduced to 18, or the age of majority (legal adulthood) should be raised to 21 across the board.
It makes little sense to argue that someone is not mature enough to walk into the grocery store and buy a six pack at 18, but that they ARE mature enough to walk into a military recruiter's office and sign away 3 years of their life...possibly to lose it in a war.
Your holiday entitlements?
My employer has stated that on the night-shift cause there are only 12 of us working he will not give any 2 people the same holidays even if it is only a day. His he within his legal right, as i thought as long as you had earned your hols, you could take them anytime.
Answer:
I am afraid he is within his rights - we have the same system at work, if one person has holiday booked another can not go then. It is upto the manager. First come first served basis. It is legal.
He is within his legal right to restrict time off to only 1 (or whatever number he's comfortable with) person per day. This is for vacation or personal time off.
As for holidays, if the company is closed, then no one works.
Yes, unfortunatly he is. However he is also obliged to give you ample opportunity to take your holidays. Best option is to book them as early as possible.
I work in finance and can't take holidays for the last three days and first four days of the month. It is a reall pain.
Firstly, contractual conditions of employment can be changed at anytime. Even verbal working contracts are binding too.
However, employers can impose their own working terms, such as when holidays can be taken. That is why millions have to take holidays at fixed times of the year, such as at factory close-down times, rather than when they would really like to take them.
Wages can also go down and not just upwards too! Hence we have no right to an annual pay rise. The sad truth.
Good luck! Rob
he has the right to say if it takes a minimum of 11 people to work safely for the night shift one 1 person at a time can have holiday. However under the new EU working time directive you are entitled to 2weeks holiday in the summer !!! so get your Union onto it,
Answer:
I am afraid he is within his rights - we have the same system at work, if one person has holiday booked another can not go then. It is upto the manager. First come first served basis. It is legal.
He is within his legal right to restrict time off to only 1 (or whatever number he's comfortable with) person per day. This is for vacation or personal time off.
As for holidays, if the company is closed, then no one works.
Yes, unfortunatly he is. However he is also obliged to give you ample opportunity to take your holidays. Best option is to book them as early as possible.
I work in finance and can't take holidays for the last three days and first four days of the month. It is a reall pain.
Firstly, contractual conditions of employment can be changed at anytime. Even verbal working contracts are binding too.
However, employers can impose their own working terms, such as when holidays can be taken. That is why millions have to take holidays at fixed times of the year, such as at factory close-down times, rather than when they would really like to take them.
Wages can also go down and not just upwards too! Hence we have no right to an annual pay rise. The sad truth.
Good luck! Rob
he has the right to say if it takes a minimum of 11 people to work safely for the night shift one 1 person at a time can have holiday. However under the new EU working time directive you are entitled to 2weeks holiday in the summer !!! so get your Union onto it,
Your association?
a member of the public joins your freely open association or society, shortly there after this same person commits some terrible crime. this person is also a member of several other associations / societies and has expressly gone against every part of your rules, regulations.
does your association and its law abiding members owe an apology to the victim.
Answer:
not unless the association sanctioned the actions or ordered those actions.
The association does not need to apologize on behalf of the individual.
However, it would be a good idea to send a statment saying that you are sorry for the victims loss (or injury) and that the beliefs of the criminal have nothing to do with your association.
Of course not (though it may depend on the situation). The organization should, however, publicly denounce his membership, having broken your membership guidelines.
There is nothing wrong with expressing your regret over the crime to the victim/victims family, that is a humane thing to do.
You do not need to apologise as a society, but you should deprecate the crime and place a clear distance between yourselves and the member that so betrayed you - not only for the sake of the victim, but also to restate publicly what you are really all about.
Cheers, Steve.
does your association and its law abiding members owe an apology to the victim.
Answer:
not unless the association sanctioned the actions or ordered those actions.
The association does not need to apologize on behalf of the individual.
However, it would be a good idea to send a statment saying that you are sorry for the victims loss (or injury) and that the beliefs of the criminal have nothing to do with your association.
Of course not (though it may depend on the situation). The organization should, however, publicly denounce his membership, having broken your membership guidelines.
There is nothing wrong with expressing your regret over the crime to the victim/victims family, that is a humane thing to do.
You do not need to apologise as a society, but you should deprecate the crime and place a clear distance between yourselves and the member that so betrayed you - not only for the sake of the victim, but also to restate publicly what you are really all about.
Cheers, Steve.
Your assesment of whether to make a complaint to BBB with a local business I dealt with?
I took my lawnmower blades in to a local service shop, in which i had purchaed a snow blower and lawnmower from them in the past spending at least 2K.
I dropped off my lawnmower blades on a Friday, for sharpening and was told they would be ready on the following Monday after 11:00am. Monday came and I arrived to pick up my blades on my lunch hour from work and the clerk told me they were not ready. He said they could work on it now and I told him he failed to fulfill a time commitment, and they never called me at home to say they woudn't be done on time. I asked for a discount for time and inconvience, which he had to get the manager. He told me firmly i would not be getting a discount, and that he could get right on it now and they would be done in 30 miunutes. This was not good customer service in my eyes. They were backed up he stated and also stated to me have YOU been perfect in your life? I told him to take some customer service classes and took my blades and walked out.
Answer:
Agree with the above poster...if he was not done within a few days, then you would have a case...because of an hour, no.
A prudent person would have called be sure they were ready prior to wasting their lunch hour to go over and pick up the blades.
You are being unreasonable - despite what the clerk promised you or offered about when your blades would be ready, the clerk cannot possibly account for what might delay that delivery time. The clerk works in the front and I presume doesn't actually do the blade sharpening or other mechanical work. Are you really out anything? Perhaps the customer service response wasn't the greatest, but neither is asking a business owner to give you a discount for not meeting a deadline selected by the front desk clerk. I think offering to do your blades within 30 minutes was excellent customer service - he tried to make you happy and get to you immediately when he learned of the problem. And, something tells me that your attitude was probably a factor in his final response. Let it go -
I dropped off my lawnmower blades on a Friday, for sharpening and was told they would be ready on the following Monday after 11:00am. Monday came and I arrived to pick up my blades on my lunch hour from work and the clerk told me they were not ready. He said they could work on it now and I told him he failed to fulfill a time commitment, and they never called me at home to say they woudn't be done on time. I asked for a discount for time and inconvience, which he had to get the manager. He told me firmly i would not be getting a discount, and that he could get right on it now and they would be done in 30 miunutes. This was not good customer service in my eyes. They were backed up he stated and also stated to me have YOU been perfect in your life? I told him to take some customer service classes and took my blades and walked out.
Answer:
Agree with the above poster...if he was not done within a few days, then you would have a case...because of an hour, no.
A prudent person would have called be sure they were ready prior to wasting their lunch hour to go over and pick up the blades.
You are being unreasonable - despite what the clerk promised you or offered about when your blades would be ready, the clerk cannot possibly account for what might delay that delivery time. The clerk works in the front and I presume doesn't actually do the blade sharpening or other mechanical work. Are you really out anything? Perhaps the customer service response wasn't the greatest, but neither is asking a business owner to give you a discount for not meeting a deadline selected by the front desk clerk. I think offering to do your blades within 30 minutes was excellent customer service - he tried to make you happy and get to you immediately when he learned of the problem. And, something tells me that your attitude was probably a factor in his final response. Let it go -
You WON $50,000 prizes but suddenly the organizer told you..?
...APRIL FOOL !! or It's all a joke Ha ha ha - what will u do or say
Answer:
If it were April 1st, I would not have believed him in the first place.
I'd probably knock his teeth out!
I wouldn't believe him in the first place, so there will be no disappointment.
I would e-mail the organizer and tell them how I felt about doing that and that it was false advertising!!! ThenI would say i am going to sue you!!!!!!!! And at the bottom of the letter i would say April fools, or Jk
Tell him the first round is on him.
Ha Ha! See you in court *****!
That was rude I really thought that I WON $50000 prizes. Yet again I say how rude!
I would sue and would win in court. There are big time federal and state rules for running fake contests....our faker would be paying the winner 50,000..unless he could prove it was obvious the contest was fake.
Answer:
If it were April 1st, I would not have believed him in the first place.
I'd probably knock his teeth out!
I wouldn't believe him in the first place, so there will be no disappointment.
I would e-mail the organizer and tell them how I felt about doing that and that it was false advertising!!! ThenI would say i am going to sue you!!!!!!!! And at the bottom of the letter i would say April fools, or Jk
Tell him the first round is on him.
Ha Ha! See you in court *****!
That was rude I really thought that I WON $50000 prizes. Yet again I say how rude!
I would sue and would win in court. There are big time federal and state rules for running fake contests....our faker would be paying the winner 50,000..unless he could prove it was obvious the contest was fake.
You think laws cant be religiously based?
read the whole question before answering please.
Whenever Liberals cant argue on their position they will SOMETIMES say the opposition is injecting their religion. Whats wrong with that? freedome of religion is the foundation of this country. Also, If laws cant be faith based then are you saying a person who has faith cant hold public office. Then it only reasons, that people of faith shouldnt be allowed to vote either. All 3 are linked, so stop with this stupid arguement
Answer:
I am a Southern Baptist, one of the most conservative Christian denominations out there, and I actually find your logic a bit faulty. Let me address your question one part at a time:
"SOMETIMES say the opposition is injecting their religion. Whats wrong with that?"
The United States is a secular government that is legally separated from a church of any sort. Individual government officials can vote and act based on their beliefs (that's their job), except for judges, but the government as a whole cannot impose certain beliefs or any kind of religious dogma onto the population as a whole. For example, the government cannot declare Islam to be illegal, just because a few crazy extremists blew up the WTC.
f"reedome of religion is the foundation of this country"
Freedom of religion also means the freedom to practice religion or abstain from it. I don't want the government telling me I have to be a practicing Catholic.
"Also, If laws cant be faith based then are you saying a person who has faith cant hold public office"
This is just flat out wrong. How you made the leap of logic for this is beyond me. There are probably a lot of closed-minded atheists who would agree with you, since they believe they are more intelligent than believers, but most of our elected officials are religious. They can vote on issues based on their beliefs, but they can't legislate anything into existence that violates the separation of church and state or individual constitutional freedoms.
"Then it only reasons, that people of faith shouldnt be allowed to vote either. "
Another astronomical leap of fallacial logic. Everyone in the country has the right to vote. It's the government that's secular, not the population.
"All 3 are linked, so stop with this stupid arguement"
It is a stupid argument, but this isn't the method to argue it. A more proper method would be to use non-faith arguments to counter liberal ones. It's hard, but it's possible and puts you on more solid ground with someone who profoundly dismisses religion.
Amen. I have noticed the Democrats running for President have been playing the race of lately, even HRC, like she really cares .
First, do you mean to say the laws can be biased towards religions or are based on religions?
At the end of the day, religion is and should indeed be a way of life restricted to one's private life! And, there should be no laws which favour or discriminate against anyone based on religion!
And, what is the stupid argument that you want others to stop?
I agree with you, however most people don't understand, is mojarity of the laws we have today came directly from the word of GOD, if a person studys there bible today, one would actually find the bankruptcy laws, and some of the laws of health, DR's use in pre- surgery, don't quote on this one but I am pretty sure, and these are the few I know off the top of my head, so that argument is dead anyway, look at our Judges today they are still following some of rules and regulation, or standards they self's must live by in order to become appointed as a judge, those principles or precepts are inside the Holy Bible.
Is this a question?
There IS freedom of religion. There is also freedom from establishment of any particular religion (hence the name, "establishment clause"). The state can do nothing that establishes or gives preference to a particular religion over others, but cannot restrict you from practicing your religion (unreasonably, in the event your practice tromps on the rights of others).
Take the famous Christmas manger scene issue. If City Hall (e.g., the State) allows a manger scene at City Hall at Christmas, it has ordained a preference for a particular religion (Christianity). If challenged, it can either choose to remove the manger scene (and all the Christians going crying to Fox News), OR they can allow equal access to *all* religions for their festivities- Menorahs at Hannukah, Muslim thingies during Ramadan, Kwanzaa, etc. That would include things you might find offensive (such as a Santeria group sacrificing a goat, perhaps, or Satan worshippers putting up pentagrams for Dark Night or whatever they celebrate).
If Christians (and I am one) would simply accept the fact that other religions exist and allow them to peacefully coexist as equal religions on this country, you could have your manger scenes, Young Life meetings in school,etc. The Supreme Court ruled decades ago along these lines (Allegheny County vs. ACLU).
Your question fails to logically connect between posit#2 (laws can't be faith based) and posit #3 (people of faith can't hold office). People of faith can hold office, and always have. They just can't use their position to bludgeon other religions into submission.
freedom of religion was not the reason that this country was founded. it was one reason of many. it was not the foremost reason.
this country was founded in 1776, not by the pilgrims in 1620. the main reasons were taxation without representation, and desire for independance from english rule.
religion was given tax free status and an agreement that it would not be interfered with by the government. there are good reasons for not mixing politics and religion although some people seem to think that they should be intertwined.
religion based laws? most of the islamic countries have this.
the most important laws transend religion. every country has laws against murder, robbery, rape, arson, kidnapping. they didnt have to consult the bible to think off them. its common sense, you cannot maintain a civilized society without them.
Yes our country is founded on freedom of religion and also separation of church and state. By your reasoning then it should be okay to make laws based on the Muslim faith. How well do you think Christian Americans would react to that? They would probably would feel very offended. But yet these same Christians think it's okay to make Christian law=American Law and having non-Christians follow them whether they like it or not. America is suppose to be a secular state as planned by our founding fathers, "One Nation Under God" means the God that created all of us, no matter what religion we belong to.
first let me enlighten you to the fact that "law isn't necessarily justice; it's how it happens to be interpreted". that is what precedents is about.
yes there is Law that is of this earth and there is the bible which is Law that is not of this earth....God's law. we are commanded by the bible to obey the law....that is, any law.
please don't mistake Christianity for religion. religion is the segregation of the christian faith. Christianity has no segregation. it seems a conflict of interest to be a holy man and a politician because a person ends up compromising their own beliefs.
we are fortunate that God in his infinite wisdom and grace allows us our own discretion. with all of the precedents formed in modern law the clarity of right and wrong seems more and more distorted.
All law is religion based. Law is based on societal values, a society usually has a large percentage of religious adherents. Thus law is based in religion in some ways no matter where you are with perhaps the exception of a communist state but then most communist states also have religious populations who tend to lend their own social values onto the culture itself.
Whenever Liberals cant argue on their position they will SOMETIMES say the opposition is injecting their religion. Whats wrong with that? freedome of religion is the foundation of this country. Also, If laws cant be faith based then are you saying a person who has faith cant hold public office. Then it only reasons, that people of faith shouldnt be allowed to vote either. All 3 are linked, so stop with this stupid arguement
Answer:
I am a Southern Baptist, one of the most conservative Christian denominations out there, and I actually find your logic a bit faulty. Let me address your question one part at a time:
"SOMETIMES say the opposition is injecting their religion. Whats wrong with that?"
The United States is a secular government that is legally separated from a church of any sort. Individual government officials can vote and act based on their beliefs (that's their job), except for judges, but the government as a whole cannot impose certain beliefs or any kind of religious dogma onto the population as a whole. For example, the government cannot declare Islam to be illegal, just because a few crazy extremists blew up the WTC.
f"reedome of religion is the foundation of this country"
Freedom of religion also means the freedom to practice religion or abstain from it. I don't want the government telling me I have to be a practicing Catholic.
"Also, If laws cant be faith based then are you saying a person who has faith cant hold public office"
This is just flat out wrong. How you made the leap of logic for this is beyond me. There are probably a lot of closed-minded atheists who would agree with you, since they believe they are more intelligent than believers, but most of our elected officials are religious. They can vote on issues based on their beliefs, but they can't legislate anything into existence that violates the separation of church and state or individual constitutional freedoms.
"Then it only reasons, that people of faith shouldnt be allowed to vote either. "
Another astronomical leap of fallacial logic. Everyone in the country has the right to vote. It's the government that's secular, not the population.
"All 3 are linked, so stop with this stupid arguement"
It is a stupid argument, but this isn't the method to argue it. A more proper method would be to use non-faith arguments to counter liberal ones. It's hard, but it's possible and puts you on more solid ground with someone who profoundly dismisses religion.
Amen. I have noticed the Democrats running for President have been playing the race of lately, even HRC, like she really cares .
First, do you mean to say the laws can be biased towards religions or are based on religions?
At the end of the day, religion is and should indeed be a way of life restricted to one's private life! And, there should be no laws which favour or discriminate against anyone based on religion!
And, what is the stupid argument that you want others to stop?
I agree with you, however most people don't understand, is mojarity of the laws we have today came directly from the word of GOD, if a person studys there bible today, one would actually find the bankruptcy laws, and some of the laws of health, DR's use in pre- surgery, don't quote on this one but I am pretty sure, and these are the few I know off the top of my head, so that argument is dead anyway, look at our Judges today they are still following some of rules and regulation, or standards they self's must live by in order to become appointed as a judge, those principles or precepts are inside the Holy Bible.
Is this a question?
There IS freedom of religion. There is also freedom from establishment of any particular religion (hence the name, "establishment clause"). The state can do nothing that establishes or gives preference to a particular religion over others, but cannot restrict you from practicing your religion (unreasonably, in the event your practice tromps on the rights of others).
Take the famous Christmas manger scene issue. If City Hall (e.g., the State) allows a manger scene at City Hall at Christmas, it has ordained a preference for a particular religion (Christianity). If challenged, it can either choose to remove the manger scene (and all the Christians going crying to Fox News), OR they can allow equal access to *all* religions for their festivities- Menorahs at Hannukah, Muslim thingies during Ramadan, Kwanzaa, etc. That would include things you might find offensive (such as a Santeria group sacrificing a goat, perhaps, or Satan worshippers putting up pentagrams for Dark Night or whatever they celebrate).
If Christians (and I am one) would simply accept the fact that other religions exist and allow them to peacefully coexist as equal religions on this country, you could have your manger scenes, Young Life meetings in school,etc. The Supreme Court ruled decades ago along these lines (Allegheny County vs. ACLU).
Your question fails to logically connect between posit#2 (laws can't be faith based) and posit #3 (people of faith can't hold office). People of faith can hold office, and always have. They just can't use their position to bludgeon other religions into submission.
freedom of religion was not the reason that this country was founded. it was one reason of many. it was not the foremost reason.
this country was founded in 1776, not by the pilgrims in 1620. the main reasons were taxation without representation, and desire for independance from english rule.
religion was given tax free status and an agreement that it would not be interfered with by the government. there are good reasons for not mixing politics and religion although some people seem to think that they should be intertwined.
religion based laws? most of the islamic countries have this.
the most important laws transend religion. every country has laws against murder, robbery, rape, arson, kidnapping. they didnt have to consult the bible to think off them. its common sense, you cannot maintain a civilized society without them.
Yes our country is founded on freedom of religion and also separation of church and state. By your reasoning then it should be okay to make laws based on the Muslim faith. How well do you think Christian Americans would react to that? They would probably would feel very offended. But yet these same Christians think it's okay to make Christian law=American Law and having non-Christians follow them whether they like it or not. America is suppose to be a secular state as planned by our founding fathers, "One Nation Under God" means the God that created all of us, no matter what religion we belong to.
first let me enlighten you to the fact that "law isn't necessarily justice; it's how it happens to be interpreted". that is what precedents is about.
yes there is Law that is of this earth and there is the bible which is Law that is not of this earth....God's law. we are commanded by the bible to obey the law....that is, any law.
please don't mistake Christianity for religion. religion is the segregation of the christian faith. Christianity has no segregation. it seems a conflict of interest to be a holy man and a politician because a person ends up compromising their own beliefs.
we are fortunate that God in his infinite wisdom and grace allows us our own discretion. with all of the precedents formed in modern law the clarity of right and wrong seems more and more distorted.
All law is religion based. Law is based on societal values, a society usually has a large percentage of religious adherents. Thus law is based in religion in some ways no matter where you are with perhaps the exception of a communist state but then most communist states also have religious populations who tend to lend their own social values onto the culture itself.
You prove drugs (before or now)?
Answer:
???????
keep taking the tablets
what? i think you proved drugs, or the effect thereof.
did you take drugs before or now before you asked that question?
And I thought I was stu pid!
after just reading that::!!! i would never approve what ever your on ::!!
Can I have some of what you're doing?
You normally don't hear about this on the news...?
In this news story, an 82 year-old woman (crowned Miss America in 1944) who pulled out her handgun when she caught an intruder trespassing on her property, was able to keep him from getting away until the Police showed up! Way to go!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070421/ap_o...
If more Americans were packin' like this Granny, crime would plummet! :D
Answer:
This is logic that can not be so easily ignored, yet so many insist on ignoring it.
The best argument is that town in Georgia where they passed a law in 1982 requiring all households to have a gun. Since then the population has increased FIVE FOLD (for you Bush-supporters, FIVE FOLD means it has multiplied by 5) and the crime rate and murder rate have plummeted dramatically.
Here where I live, there is this blind man who runs a concession at the local court house for years. He is very well known. Anyway, an intruder entered his house one night, and the blind man shot him twice............................ The whole town made the intruder the brunt of jokes for a long time. Dont mess with granny or a blind man.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070421/ap_o...
If more Americans were packin' like this Granny, crime would plummet! :D
Answer:
This is logic that can not be so easily ignored, yet so many insist on ignoring it.
The best argument is that town in Georgia where they passed a law in 1982 requiring all households to have a gun. Since then the population has increased FIVE FOLD (for you Bush-supporters, FIVE FOLD means it has multiplied by 5) and the crime rate and murder rate have plummeted dramatically.
Here where I live, there is this blind man who runs a concession at the local court house for years. He is very well known. Anyway, an intruder entered his house one night, and the blind man shot him twice............................ The whole town made the intruder the brunt of jokes for a long time. Dont mess with granny or a blind man.
You have informed me that my "question may expire in 48 hours" WHY? and how do you extend the inquiry?
If I person is unable to extend the question what the hell the point of using this site?
Answer:
lots of people think its the + icon but it's not. go to the page of your question. under the question, you'll see rectangular icon's. hover on the one with the pen and there will be a "extend question" option. click on that.
to drive you crazy?
There is a provision for extending the expiry of a given question - maybe you are unaware of that!
as the deadline time approaches, YAHOO sends you an email informing you of how to extend the question time, dont worry about it, its possible
If you don't get a response in 3 days, then you probably won't get an answer. All you have to do, is ask the same question, and vary the wording a bit. Like the one above, instead of saying 48 hours, say two days.
Go to your question and under it there should be a little blue highlighted box with a star, a flag a mail envelope and a + sign, click on the + sign and then click extend time ;-)
Questions may be extended and left open a little longer. Go to the question and then just underneath the question details will be a few icons - like the star, the flag, etc. On one of them you'll be able to extend the deadline for your question.
Answer:
lots of people think its the + icon but it's not. go to the page of your question. under the question, you'll see rectangular icon's. hover on the one with the pen and there will be a "extend question" option. click on that.
to drive you crazy?
There is a provision for extending the expiry of a given question - maybe you are unaware of that!
as the deadline time approaches, YAHOO sends you an email informing you of how to extend the question time, dont worry about it, its possible
If you don't get a response in 3 days, then you probably won't get an answer. All you have to do, is ask the same question, and vary the wording a bit. Like the one above, instead of saying 48 hours, say two days.
Go to your question and under it there should be a little blue highlighted box with a star, a flag a mail envelope and a + sign, click on the + sign and then click extend time ;-)
Questions may be extended and left open a little longer. Go to the question and then just underneath the question details will be a few icons - like the star, the flag, etc. On one of them you'll be able to extend the deadline for your question.
You go to a country Illegally with the Intent to Kill soldiers, Do you have rights to a Public paid Attorney
read what we did in WW2 to sabotuers that never got to commit sabotage. Germany was a recognized enemy of the USA and a signer of the Geneva convention. Perhaps we need someone with a set to step up and say NO to the ACLU these are Not recognized Soldiers from a recognized signor of the Geneva convention and NOT Protected BY DUE Process of Law. I am NOT including the citizen scumbags in this rant although I would try them in Texas if I had the choice.
http://www.montauklife.com/history/histo...
Answer:
I'm sorry but I might be a little slow on this, so I went and pulled up my trusty copy of the constitution and the bill of rights.
I cannot find where it says that aliens have these same inalienable rights. This is an AMerican constitution, for Americans.
Not sure what your point is, maybe that all the us soldiers and politicians who have gone to Iraq should be tried with no access to an attorney?
After all Iraq did not attack US and there were no WMD. The whole thing over there is a false war.
An interesting question. As far as I am concerned, law breaker illegal aliens need to find their own attorney for which they should pay. They have he money to perform their assignment; lt them use that, or use some of the frozen terrorist funds. The best thing to do with them is to send them to Guantanamo, and forget about courts. I certainly don't want my tax money used to defend them.
You need to increase your daily source of fiber........
.
Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. America love it or leave it. Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. Leave it Now. Zero tolerance for immigration-law violators! No amnesty, no "stealth-amnesty." No "change of status," marriage fraud, "exceptional leave to remain," no "Temporary Protected Status." If you break the law, depart or be deported. Illegal aliens kill more US citizens each year than the war in Iraq has killed in four years. Apologists for illegal immigration like to paint it as a victimless crime. But in fact, illegal immigration causes substantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population--the poor, minorities, and children. Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees. Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America--crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland. Taxpayers are being forced to pay for the free health care, education, and other welfare programs being given to illegal aliens; Those tax dollars could be given back to U.S. taxpayers or used to keep our borders secure; They may be here illegally, but they sure know how to "work the system" to collect "free" medical care, "free" education, "free" food, Section 8 housing vouchers and other housing assistance, and hundreds of other social services. It costs citizens additional hundreds of billions of tax dollars at every level: local, state, and federal. It gobbles up billions of our charitable contributions. And much of that money ends up siphoned out of our economy and into offshore accounts. Illegal aliens, over half of whom work "under the table" with neither job nor income reported (nor taxed), are not counted as employed or unemployed. But some of those day-labor and off-the-books "job-lets" would be "real" jobs - available to American citizen job-seekers - if employment regulations were enforced. Illegal aliens can get away with tax evasion, et al., which citizens cannot. In short, we have too many workforce entrants and too few jobs created. The ratio works out to roughly 7-10 workforce entrants per job created. If all illegal aliens depart or are deported, all legal immigration halted, and all temporary employment visas abolished, we still have a problem with more US-born workforce entrants than new jobs created. Illegal immigration damages our country and our citizens every day at every level. And not even the attacks of 2/26 and 9/11 have awakened many Americans to the vast dangers illegal immigration poses to our selves, our families, our communities, our society, our values, our principles, our civilization. Zero Tolerance for Immigration-Law Violators! We must remember the lessons of 2/26, 9/11, and the costs we bear every single day. God Bless the U S A !
It sounds like you are referring to the "Fort Dix 6" The whole thing makes me sick. As illegal aliens that just happen to be terrorists, the only thing they have a right to is a free stay at Guntanamo Bay, Cuba.
I wonder if this will give other illegals ideas to try and use laws they aren't entitled to for thier own personal gain.
http://www.montauklife.com/history/histo...
Answer:
I'm sorry but I might be a little slow on this, so I went and pulled up my trusty copy of the constitution and the bill of rights.
I cannot find where it says that aliens have these same inalienable rights. This is an AMerican constitution, for Americans.
Not sure what your point is, maybe that all the us soldiers and politicians who have gone to Iraq should be tried with no access to an attorney?
After all Iraq did not attack US and there were no WMD. The whole thing over there is a false war.
An interesting question. As far as I am concerned, law breaker illegal aliens need to find their own attorney for which they should pay. They have he money to perform their assignment; lt them use that, or use some of the frozen terrorist funds. The best thing to do with them is to send them to Guantanamo, and forget about courts. I certainly don't want my tax money used to defend them.
You need to increase your daily source of fiber........
.
Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. America love it or leave it. Unlawful Entry is a CRIME. Leave it Now. Zero tolerance for immigration-law violators! No amnesty, no "stealth-amnesty." No "change of status," marriage fraud, "exceptional leave to remain," no "Temporary Protected Status." If you break the law, depart or be deported. Illegal aliens kill more US citizens each year than the war in Iraq has killed in four years. Apologists for illegal immigration like to paint it as a victimless crime. But in fact, illegal immigration causes substantial harm to American citizens and legal immigrants, particularly those in the most vulnerable sectors of our population--the poor, minorities, and children. Additionally, job competition by waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees. Illegal immigration also contributes to the dramatic population growth overwhelming communities across America--crowding school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland. Taxpayers are being forced to pay for the free health care, education, and other welfare programs being given to illegal aliens; Those tax dollars could be given back to U.S. taxpayers or used to keep our borders secure; They may be here illegally, but they sure know how to "work the system" to collect "free" medical care, "free" education, "free" food, Section 8 housing vouchers and other housing assistance, and hundreds of other social services. It costs citizens additional hundreds of billions of tax dollars at every level: local, state, and federal. It gobbles up billions of our charitable contributions. And much of that money ends up siphoned out of our economy and into offshore accounts. Illegal aliens, over half of whom work "under the table" with neither job nor income reported (nor taxed), are not counted as employed or unemployed. But some of those day-labor and off-the-books "job-lets" would be "real" jobs - available to American citizen job-seekers - if employment regulations were enforced. Illegal aliens can get away with tax evasion, et al., which citizens cannot. In short, we have too many workforce entrants and too few jobs created. The ratio works out to roughly 7-10 workforce entrants per job created. If all illegal aliens depart or are deported, all legal immigration halted, and all temporary employment visas abolished, we still have a problem with more US-born workforce entrants than new jobs created. Illegal immigration damages our country and our citizens every day at every level. And not even the attacks of 2/26 and 9/11 have awakened many Americans to the vast dangers illegal immigration poses to our selves, our families, our communities, our society, our values, our principles, our civilization. Zero Tolerance for Immigration-Law Violators! We must remember the lessons of 2/26, 9/11, and the costs we bear every single day. God Bless the U S A !
It sounds like you are referring to the "Fort Dix 6" The whole thing makes me sick. As illegal aliens that just happen to be terrorists, the only thing they have a right to is a free stay at Guntanamo Bay, Cuba.
I wonder if this will give other illegals ideas to try and use laws they aren't entitled to for thier own personal gain.
Yes, yes, we know you client is innocent...?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/law/05/10/milita...
I mean, what else are they going to say after they lost the case...asking a lawyer if his/her client is innocent is like asking the mother of a gang-banger if her child is still the same cuddly entity she brought home...but of COURSE!!!
The heading here above is funny...Law and ETHICS!
Answer:
yes mother dearest.
A smart defendant will NEVER tell his lawyer "Yup, I did it. Do the best you can".
-MM
What I find funny is they claim he is innocent, but it sounds like their only gripes are about procedural issues, not the actual guilt or innocence of their treasonous client.
Some are inocent, but the real problem lies in the justice system. Inocent until proven guilty WHAT A JOKE and noone is laughing. It IS guilty until proven inocent. And would you want to be inocent, with no money to hire an attorney an have one apointed to you? They will work their hardest to make a name for themselves. But what if they loose No one will remember them If they win they are heros. I would want an exp. attn. If i am guilty it is their job to get me off, if i am inocent then set me free and let it go
I mean, what else are they going to say after they lost the case...asking a lawyer if his/her client is innocent is like asking the mother of a gang-banger if her child is still the same cuddly entity she brought home...but of COURSE!!!
The heading here above is funny...Law and ETHICS!
Answer:
yes mother dearest.
A smart defendant will NEVER tell his lawyer "Yup, I did it. Do the best you can".
-MM
What I find funny is they claim he is innocent, but it sounds like their only gripes are about procedural issues, not the actual guilt or innocence of their treasonous client.
Some are inocent, but the real problem lies in the justice system. Inocent until proven guilty WHAT A JOKE and noone is laughing. It IS guilty until proven inocent. And would you want to be inocent, with no money to hire an attorney an have one apointed to you? They will work their hardest to make a name for themselves. But what if they loose No one will remember them If they win they are heros. I would want an exp. attn. If i am guilty it is their job to get me off, if i am inocent then set me free and let it go
Yahoo!Mail gives membersrandom cash prizes.so My account is selected.yahoo has given me link to collect money?
yahoo has given me linked is not opened so i cant collect my prize so give me information to take it
Answer:
Scam, do not give any personal information or you will be sorry. If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is. .
edit: www.snoops.com type in yahoo e-mail lottery.
Oh yeah, I get that all the time.
rigghhhttt...just send your bank account info to ethiopia and nigeria...theyll help you collect....
never open any mail that you are unfamiliar with - never! delete it. emails from people or companies you have not requested info from, requesting info from you are scams! they can say they're yahoo, to make you feel comfortable w/ giving out personal info. don't do it!
2 words.
Pure scam.
It's scam, just ignore it and report it cause somebody is using Y! Names on frauds.
Keep away from this. They will ask your personal details like credit card, bank account, etc. You give it and you are doomed.
just one advice : SCrAM.
There is a gang in west africa... they do all these
phising
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/phising...
do not give any info
Answer:
Scam, do not give any personal information or you will be sorry. If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is. .
edit: www.snoops.com type in yahoo e-mail lottery.
Oh yeah, I get that all the time.
rigghhhttt...just send your bank account info to ethiopia and nigeria...theyll help you collect....
never open any mail that you are unfamiliar with - never! delete it. emails from people or companies you have not requested info from, requesting info from you are scams! they can say they're yahoo, to make you feel comfortable w/ giving out personal info. don't do it!
2 words.
Pure scam.
It's scam, just ignore it and report it cause somebody is using Y! Names on frauds.
Keep away from this. They will ask your personal details like credit card, bank account, etc. You give it and you are doomed.
just one advice : SCrAM.
There is a gang in west africa... they do all these
phising
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/phising...
do not give any info
Yahoo Awards Center, is this real?
Yahoo Awards Center
124 Stockport Road, Longsight, Manchester M60 2DB - United Kingdom
This is to inform you that you have won a prize money of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars (US$3,500,000.00) for the month of April, 2007 Prize promotion which is organized by YAHOO AWARDS %26 WINDOWS LIVE.
YAHOO collects all the email addresses of the people that are active online, among the millions that subscribed to Yahoo and Hotmail and few from other e-mail providers. Six people are selected monthly to benefit from this promotion and you are one of the Selected Winners.
PAYMENT OF PRIZE AND CLAIM
Winners shall be paid in accordance with his/her Settlement Centre. Yahoo Prize Award must be claimed no later than 15 days from date of Draw Notification. Any prize not claimed within this period will be forfeited.
Stated below are your identification numbers:
TICKET NUMBER: 123 123456
Answer:
No, do not give any personal information or money to these people, its a scam. Wouldn't you think that Yahoo would want publicity about a drawing like this? They certainly have the means owning a site like this. A general rule and words to live by, if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
Plus look at your ticket number: "123 123456" LOL, could they make it any more obvious to you?
Dont you think if yahoo did that, they woudl have made some kind of announcement about it?
Don't you think that if they had $3,500,000 U.S. dollars to give away, that they could at least hire someone who could write English well enough to make some semblance of sense in the announcement email.
Any email containing the words "this is to inform you that you have won a prize money..." has to be written by someone who either is grammatically challenged or does not speak English as a native language. Either way I'd steer a long way away.
124 Stockport Road, Longsight, Manchester M60 2DB - United Kingdom
This is to inform you that you have won a prize money of Three Million Five Hundred Thousand United States Dollars (US$3,500,000.00) for the month of April, 2007 Prize promotion which is organized by YAHOO AWARDS %26 WINDOWS LIVE.
YAHOO collects all the email addresses of the people that are active online, among the millions that subscribed to Yahoo and Hotmail and few from other e-mail providers. Six people are selected monthly to benefit from this promotion and you are one of the Selected Winners.
PAYMENT OF PRIZE AND CLAIM
Winners shall be paid in accordance with his/her Settlement Centre. Yahoo Prize Award must be claimed no later than 15 days from date of Draw Notification. Any prize not claimed within this period will be forfeited.
Stated below are your identification numbers:
TICKET NUMBER: 123 123456
Answer:
No, do not give any personal information or money to these people, its a scam. Wouldn't you think that Yahoo would want publicity about a drawing like this? They certainly have the means owning a site like this. A general rule and words to live by, if it sounds too good to be true, it usually is.
Plus look at your ticket number: "123 123456" LOL, could they make it any more obvious to you?
Dont you think if yahoo did that, they woudl have made some kind of announcement about it?
Don't you think that if they had $3,500,000 U.S. dollars to give away, that they could at least hire someone who could write English well enough to make some semblance of sense in the announcement email.
Any email containing the words "this is to inform you that you have won a prize money..." has to be written by someone who either is grammatically challenged or does not speak English as a native language. Either way I'd steer a long way away.
Yahoo assisted China with torture?
If you care about human rights, it is time to end your association with Yahoo. They seem to be more interested in money than human rights. Spread the word. Maybe Yahoo will wake up if people close their accounts all at once.
This will be the last time I use Yahoo.
Response by Yahoo to allegations:
Yahoo has acknowledged turning over data on its users at the request of the Chinese government, saying company employees face civil and criminal sanctions if they ignore local laws.
Without commenting directly on a federal lawsuit the human rights group had prepared against Yahoo, company spokesman Jim Cullinan said such matters are "better suited for diplomacy than it is in the legal forum."
He said that although company officials are "distressed that citizens in China have been imprisoned for expressing their political view on the Internet," Yahoo plans to keep offering services in China out of a belief the Internet can promote change and transform lives in that country
Answer:
Why am I not surprised that these things happen. They would rather do business with communists than protect the people that are being oppressed. Sickening!
I THINK THEY DID!
This will be the last time I use Yahoo.
Response by Yahoo to allegations:
Yahoo has acknowledged turning over data on its users at the request of the Chinese government, saying company employees face civil and criminal sanctions if they ignore local laws.
Without commenting directly on a federal lawsuit the human rights group had prepared against Yahoo, company spokesman Jim Cullinan said such matters are "better suited for diplomacy than it is in the legal forum."
He said that although company officials are "distressed that citizens in China have been imprisoned for expressing their political view on the Internet," Yahoo plans to keep offering services in China out of a belief the Internet can promote change and transform lives in that country
Answer:
Why am I not surprised that these things happen. They would rather do business with communists than protect the people that are being oppressed. Sickening!
I THINK THEY DID!
Y is abortion legal?
Y do people kill innocent children because they think its their own body? Please giv me an answer
Answer:
Why should it be illegal?
Under our Constitution, we have freedom to do as we please unless the government can prove that some particular freedom is detrimental to society as a whole in such an overwhelming way that it overrides an individual's right to his/her personal liberties.
"think" its their own body? A fetus is incapable of surviving outside the womb for the first two trimesters. Therefor it is not its own body yet. Therefor it is not a child, but a fetus.
Until a child is born, it is a parasitic organism inside a female body. The woman has full rights to determine what happens to anything inside her body.
First, THOMAS, I sense you'll never be pregnant. Second, it is a choice for the mother-to-be, and a choice which has no place for debate from men like you. Do you know how many pregnancies can result from incest or date rape?
Leave it alone if you can't understand it.
.
All those pictures of aborted babies you see pro-lifers waving around are of late-term abortions. All but about 3% of abortions occur before 21 weeks.
Blastocytes are not humans, they are aggregate cell clumps.
To protect the reputations and careers of dominatrix type Republican hags. I know this because I am Republican. Democrats have children to get public money.
Because in the landmark Roe Vs. Wade case, the supreme court ruled that its a states rights issue. If you're state says its legal, then it is.
Fetus' are not children, that's why there are terms like zygote, fetus, etc. Children are born human beings.
And there are times when an abortion is necessary-- e.g. the fetus is already dead or severly deformed. The pregnancy will kill both mother and fetus, etc.
same reason we kill people for killing people to teach them it is wrong to kill people
The Supreme Court says it is a privacy issue. However, at the same time, it is a double murder to kill a pregnant woman. It is my feeling that at some point a new case will make it to the supreme court based on a different way of looking at abortion. As an example, the 4-5 month premature baby that survived after birth.
The president and congress can't change what the supreme court has decided. I don't even think they have the right to modify it according to our laws. People are working on this all the time. It may change back just a suddenly as it became legal. People didn't vote or lobby on this issue to make abortion legal.
It should not be an issue in elections. If our elected officials could change it, don't you think they would have when they had the chance when the Republicans had the majority?
People that love children and honor life are for abortion. The pro life group are simply worshipers of the fetus. They don't care how many babies they kill as long as they can worship a fetus.
http://www.prolifeismurder.com
Like someone else said, killing a pregnant mother is considered double murder. But if you have the mothers consent it's not still killing an innocent? That unborn child has done nothing wrong. And it's not so black and white, if the fetus presents danger to the mother, I think it should be aborted, why waste two lives? You can always have more children.
BTW; Give me Liberty, you are a selfish ***, from what I see at that site, it seems like you support using abortion as birth control, if a girl gets drunk, and gets herself pregnent, she should have to deal with the consequences of her actions.
um the uterus is apart my own body fetus is own body how ever it doesnt have right use my body life support if i dont want there and no born human has right use my body life support either
Answer:
Why should it be illegal?
Under our Constitution, we have freedom to do as we please unless the government can prove that some particular freedom is detrimental to society as a whole in such an overwhelming way that it overrides an individual's right to his/her personal liberties.
"think" its their own body? A fetus is incapable of surviving outside the womb for the first two trimesters. Therefor it is not its own body yet. Therefor it is not a child, but a fetus.
Until a child is born, it is a parasitic organism inside a female body. The woman has full rights to determine what happens to anything inside her body.
First, THOMAS, I sense you'll never be pregnant. Second, it is a choice for the mother-to-be, and a choice which has no place for debate from men like you. Do you know how many pregnancies can result from incest or date rape?
Leave it alone if you can't understand it.
.
All those pictures of aborted babies you see pro-lifers waving around are of late-term abortions. All but about 3% of abortions occur before 21 weeks.
Blastocytes are not humans, they are aggregate cell clumps.
To protect the reputations and careers of dominatrix type Republican hags. I know this because I am Republican. Democrats have children to get public money.
Because in the landmark Roe Vs. Wade case, the supreme court ruled that its a states rights issue. If you're state says its legal, then it is.
Fetus' are not children, that's why there are terms like zygote, fetus, etc. Children are born human beings.
And there are times when an abortion is necessary-- e.g. the fetus is already dead or severly deformed. The pregnancy will kill both mother and fetus, etc.
same reason we kill people for killing people to teach them it is wrong to kill people
The Supreme Court says it is a privacy issue. However, at the same time, it is a double murder to kill a pregnant woman. It is my feeling that at some point a new case will make it to the supreme court based on a different way of looking at abortion. As an example, the 4-5 month premature baby that survived after birth.
The president and congress can't change what the supreme court has decided. I don't even think they have the right to modify it according to our laws. People are working on this all the time. It may change back just a suddenly as it became legal. People didn't vote or lobby on this issue to make abortion legal.
It should not be an issue in elections. If our elected officials could change it, don't you think they would have when they had the chance when the Republicans had the majority?
People that love children and honor life are for abortion. The pro life group are simply worshipers of the fetus. They don't care how many babies they kill as long as they can worship a fetus.
http://www.prolifeismurder.com
Like someone else said, killing a pregnant mother is considered double murder. But if you have the mothers consent it's not still killing an innocent? That unborn child has done nothing wrong. And it's not so black and white, if the fetus presents danger to the mother, I think it should be aborted, why waste two lives? You can always have more children.
BTW; Give me Liberty, you are a selfish ***, from what I see at that site, it seems like you support using abortion as birth control, if a girl gets drunk, and gets herself pregnent, she should have to deal with the consequences of her actions.
um the uterus is apart my own body fetus is own body how ever it doesnt have right use my body life support if i dont want there and no born human has right use my body life support either
Y do some people have to make fun of others in order to feel better about themselves?
Answer:
because it makes them feel bigger than the person they are making fun of and in control of the situation. It boosts their confidence, therefore giving them more confidence to continue on doing it. But have you ever noticed that these people hardly ever act alone?? Because behind all their friends, who give them even more confidence to be horrible, they're cowards and nothing on their own.
they don't
awww a bully it is huh! they're defects! cant deal with peeps like em. ask their momma how they raised such spoiled brats who are so darn into themselves!*sigh*
Its using ridicule to attempt to force conversion of thought. Small minded people...thinking that everyone has to think one way...automatons.
I'm always burning myself, so I'm always feeling better later. (lol)
Y can't convicted felons vote? isn't it a really dumb law?
voting is such a fundamental right, such a harsh punishment
Answer:
When that law was passed, voting was considered such a high right that losing it was considered a severe punishment. In addition to losing the right to vote, you also lose your right to own or even possess a gun and you lose the right to hold an elected office office and you can be barred from holding many government jobs. In addition, you are stigmatized as a felon, a criminal that can not be trusted.
Is this harsh? Yes, but it is supposed to be. It is the consequence for criminal behavior.
Is this fair? In most cases, yes. However, some states will allow you to get your rights reinstated. Not a simple process, but it can be done.
but when yo commit a felony you loss your rights. no voting, no guns, etc. what is bad is when a state does not re-instate them after you have served your time, like Nebraska, if you stole a car and went out joy riding with friends back in 1956, was convicted of a felony, went to the local jail for 2 weeks, and got out, even today you cannot vote or own a fire arm. now thats extreme. but I can see it if your in Prison or jail,l but not once you have served your time. I myself have a felony conviction, spent no jail time, paid no fines, and yet I cannot vote or own a gun (not that I care to own one). and my crime had nothing to do with guns or violence etc.
I don't believe its harsh; it's two-part: it's part of their punishment for commiting a crime against society; and, who wants a felon to put someone in office? Although, I bet, some anti-Bush folks would say that would-be felons elected Bush.
that is the point. it is a part of the social contract. if you cannot obey the laws then you need not be participating in the governments decision making prosess
It is a dumb law. When you commit a felony you go to jail and serve your time, after that your released but your still being punished by not being able to vote, get a decent job because most companies do a back ground check, etc.... I think time served should be time served then your records sealed, but it always comes back to haunt you. It's a messed up world we live in.
I am not going to assume you are a felon, But, If you are!?!?
You already know the answer to that question. If you are not!?!?
Whom ever you maybe talking about gave up his or her fundamental rights by committing a crime. Can't vote is just the start. Whom ever you maybe talking about ?!?! Ask them and they will tell you.
Do i think its fair?!?! No,I think the they need to try and preserve what rights ( We the people have )...We lose so may every day. And higher officials of office can get away with things that would put us in jail for rest of our lives.Its a catch 22 and a double edge sword. But, For now, If you make a mistake you need to pay the price. Thats the way it is IN LIFE!!! I think once they have done the time for the crime they should preserve some rights for that person. But, If this person continues to do the same D**N thing over and over!!
Then my answer is yes. You deserve to lose every right you have!!!
Answer:
When that law was passed, voting was considered such a high right that losing it was considered a severe punishment. In addition to losing the right to vote, you also lose your right to own or even possess a gun and you lose the right to hold an elected office office and you can be barred from holding many government jobs. In addition, you are stigmatized as a felon, a criminal that can not be trusted.
Is this harsh? Yes, but it is supposed to be. It is the consequence for criminal behavior.
Is this fair? In most cases, yes. However, some states will allow you to get your rights reinstated. Not a simple process, but it can be done.
but when yo commit a felony you loss your rights. no voting, no guns, etc. what is bad is when a state does not re-instate them after you have served your time, like Nebraska, if you stole a car and went out joy riding with friends back in 1956, was convicted of a felony, went to the local jail for 2 weeks, and got out, even today you cannot vote or own a fire arm. now thats extreme. but I can see it if your in Prison or jail,l but not once you have served your time. I myself have a felony conviction, spent no jail time, paid no fines, and yet I cannot vote or own a gun (not that I care to own one). and my crime had nothing to do with guns or violence etc.
I don't believe its harsh; it's two-part: it's part of their punishment for commiting a crime against society; and, who wants a felon to put someone in office? Although, I bet, some anti-Bush folks would say that would-be felons elected Bush.
that is the point. it is a part of the social contract. if you cannot obey the laws then you need not be participating in the governments decision making prosess
It is a dumb law. When you commit a felony you go to jail and serve your time, after that your released but your still being punished by not being able to vote, get a decent job because most companies do a back ground check, etc.... I think time served should be time served then your records sealed, but it always comes back to haunt you. It's a messed up world we live in.
I am not going to assume you are a felon, But, If you are!?!?
You already know the answer to that question. If you are not!?!?
Whom ever you maybe talking about gave up his or her fundamental rights by committing a crime. Can't vote is just the start. Whom ever you maybe talking about ?!?! Ask them and they will tell you.
Do i think its fair?!?! No,I think the they need to try and preserve what rights ( We the people have )...We lose so may every day. And higher officials of office can get away with things that would put us in jail for rest of our lives.Its a catch 22 and a double edge sword. But, For now, If you make a mistake you need to pay the price. Thats the way it is IN LIFE!!! I think once they have done the time for the crime they should preserve some rights for that person. But, If this person continues to do the same D**N thing over and over!!
Then my answer is yes. You deserve to lose every right you have!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)