As far as this case goes, I believe you've got it. The state law requires the parent's affirmative permission to fingerprint a minor. They didn't have that.
The part the State Supreme court was hearing was Six Flag's claim that there were no actual damages, so no ability to sue. The verdict was that the law includes a presumptive damage of $1000 so the mother need not show actual damage to sue.
I see. The problem is that you didn't read for comprehension. I suggested that IF it actually didn't matter to anything as you suggested that it should be discarded as a waste of money BUT if it actually is having an effect, it needs correction. That was my position from the start and I said so.
Or it means you had an emergency (such as a trip to the ER) where you accepted the debt while bent over a barrel. In some cases, you might not have accepted the debt at all but had it thrust upon you. As in you feel kind of dizzy and then you wake up as the new proud owner of a few thousand or a million dollars worth of debt.
Many argue that if no tangible harm arises from a deception or other unethical act, it cannot be "wrong:" "No harm, no foul." This is truly an insidious fallacy, because it can lead an individual to disregard the unethical nature of an action, and look only to the results of the action. Before too long, one has embraced "the ends justify the means" as an ethical system, otherwise known as "the terrorism standard."
That argument depends on pre-supposing that drug use is a deception or other unethical act. In other words, you are employing the circular reasoning that drugs are bad because drugs are bad, or perhaps the more complex drug use is bad because drugs are bad because drug use is bad. Either way, that is clearly a fallacy.
Given the DOJ position on marijuana vs the public position in nearly every poll, I would say that doubting the DOJ's credibility on that issue at least, is a majority opinion.
Worth noting, on the very different question of do I personally believe that recreational drug use is a good idea, no I do not as a general rule.
Do I believe that SOME people go down the rabbit hole with drugs, yes, absolutely. Also with gambling (online or casino), gaming, soap operas, cars, sports, audio equipment, etc. I also believe that law enforcement and criminal "justice" make those situations worse without fail.
That would be a sensible answer if prison wasn't the go-to measure for pretty much everything and anyone in trouble with the law rather than reserving it as a last resort for those who cannot or will not integrate into free society.
Consider, why don't we use ankle bracelets rather than jail to assure that someone not yet convicted of a crime shows up for their trial? And why are people on probation set up to fail so that they end up in prison?
I saw the NDIC report and critiqued it. It was junk statistics with no date behidn it. So you had the DOJ pull figured from their backside on your behalf.
The feds kinda trashed their credibility on the subject starting with commissioning "Reefer Madness".
I can pull numbers from my backside too. Lawn mowing causes levendy jillion bucks in damage a year.
Part of my issue with your theories is a reversal of cause and effect. Consider, do drugs make people dysfunctional or is it that dysfunctional people remain dysfunctional when they do drugs?
Consequence need not be punishment. Loss of peer esteem is certainly a consequence (and an unpleasant one), but it is a natural consequence, not a punishment.
All stick and no carrot just teaches that society is the enemy and must be vanquished. And honestly, if the society really is all stick and no carrot, that is exactly correct.
I said TRUMP's wall is an ineffective waste. Note that the Democrats already offered money to augment what we already have, but it wasn't Trump's worthless steel slats, so he rejected the offer.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as this case goes, I believe you've got it. The state law requires the parent's affirmative permission to fingerprint a minor. They didn't have that.
The part the State Supreme court was hearing was Six Flag's claim that there were no actual damages, so no ability to sue. The verdict was that the law includes a presumptive damage of $1000 so the mother need not show actual damage to sue.
We need to ban POTS lines and fax machines IMMEDIATELY!
Also math and email.
Perhaps you should kick a few people out of the group chats?
I do wish Signal had video calls.
More likely you do twice as much running around with your hair on fire but only accomplish half as much.
If only he could get the stupid Mongorians to stop breaking down his shitty wall.
Yes there are. One lives at 1600 Pennsylvania ave.
That is not capitalism.
OK. So?
Tell that to Comcast and Pai. The former claimed it, and the latter swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
You should read more carefully. The new API allows a static set of rules ONLY.
I see. The problem is that you didn't read for comprehension. I suggested that IF it actually didn't matter to anything as you suggested that it should be discarded as a waste of money BUT if it actually is having an effect, it needs correction. That was my position from the start and I said so.
Or it means you had an emergency (such as a trip to the ER) where you accepted the debt while bent over a barrel. In some cases, you might not have accepted the debt at all but had it thrust upon you. As in you feel kind of dizzy and then you wake up as the new proud owner of a few thousand or a million dollars worth of debt.
Where did you get the idea that this is confined to the federal level?
It also figures heavily at the state and local levels.
True for managers. As long as you find a way to bypass HR so that those managers actually see you.
Nope. I'm saying that if it isn't affecting actuiakl outcome, it's nit useful. If it IS, then it needs correction.,
Surely you're not in favor of either a useless thing or one that adds racial bias?
Except the ones who used drugs without you knowing about it.
Many argue that if no tangible harm arises from a deception or other unethical act, it cannot be "wrong:" "No harm, no foul." This is truly an insidious fallacy, because it can lead an individual to disregard the unethical nature of an action, and look only to the results of the action. Before too long, one has embraced "the ends justify the means" as an ethical system, otherwise known as "the terrorism standard."
That argument depends on pre-supposing that drug use is a deception or other unethical act. In other words, you are employing the circular reasoning that drugs are bad because drugs are bad, or perhaps the more complex drug use is bad because drugs are bad because drug use is bad. Either way, that is clearly a fallacy.
Given the DOJ position on marijuana vs the public position in nearly every poll, I would say that doubting the DOJ's credibility on that issue at least, is a majority opinion.
Worth noting, on the very different question of do I personally believe that recreational drug use is a good idea, no I do not as a general rule.
Do I believe that SOME people go down the rabbit hole with drugs, yes, absolutely. Also with gambling (online or casino), gaming, soap operas, cars, sports, audio equipment, etc. I also believe that law enforcement and criminal "justice" make those situations worse without fail.
That would be a sensible answer if prison wasn't the go-to measure for pretty much everything and anyone in trouble with the law rather than reserving it as a last resort for those who cannot or will not integrate into free society.
Consider, why don't we use ankle bracelets rather than jail to assure that someone not yet convicted of a crime shows up for their trial? And why are people on probation set up to fail so that they end up in prison?
How is that significant? It's still handwaving and junk.
I saw the NDIC report and critiqued it. It was junk statistics with no date behidn it. So you had the DOJ pull figured from their backside on your behalf.
The feds kinda trashed their credibility on the subject starting with commissioning "Reefer Madness".
So why bother with prison?
The AC I was replying to was claiming a gender wide deficit in technology skills.
I can pull numbers from my backside too. Lawn mowing causes levendy jillion bucks in damage a year.
Part of my issue with your theories is a reversal of cause and effect. Consider, do drugs make people dysfunctional or is it that dysfunctional people remain dysfunctional when they do drugs?
Consequence need not be punishment. Loss of peer esteem is certainly a consequence (and an unpleasant one), but it is a natural consequence, not a punishment.
All stick and no carrot just teaches that society is the enemy and must be vanquished. And honestly, if the society really is all stick and no carrot, that is exactly correct.
I said TRUMP's wall is an ineffective waste. Note that the Democrats already offered money to augment what we already have, but it wasn't Trump's worthless steel slats, so he rejected the offer.