No one has to buy the judge off. The judge is only allowed to consider evidence presented so if no one said this is good law and defended it, the judge could only consider the evidence challenging it. Its a done deal.
Also, people with injured kids would not have standing. They can petition a new law but the challenge would be done and over with. You cannot challenge a court ruling on just any grounds. Once the ruling is made, there has to be some sort of error or prescribed circumstance to challenge the ruling. They may however be able to sue the state if it doesn't claim soverein immunity.
A better way would be to just use the phone's blue tooth and pair it to the car. Allow the driver to enter a code and use the phone for keyless entry and such as an incentive. But just have the car tell the phone when to go into a relaxed mode or whatever when the vehicle is in gear and going over a certain speed.
There can be an override on the phone so if your a passenger, it doesn't matter and of course you can cancel the pairing. Most people will forget about the phone's features unless they want to make a call or text or whatever. But they won't feel the need to answer texts or phone calls so it will largely be transparent to them and avoid the most usages.
if a large portion of the population is killed, food won't be an immediate concern as the canned goods on the shelf of homes and super markets will last for years while production gets sorted out.
But as others have pointed out, if the clothing isn't stored properly, it won't last as long. Before air conditioning and modern insulation, cedar chests were the bees knees in providing protection for clothing and papers. so all is not lost and it won't be all that bad.
Lol.. No, I am around a lot of different people. They are generally lazy or think manual labor is beneath them. That may change with starvation, but I think it is much more likely that they will just take your food while you do all the work.
Well, you also have to remember that the 20th century was a time when many people knew a shovel was used for more then cleaning crap up from your dog and wasn't afraid to use it for those other purposes. That is widely missing in today's society I think.
Sure, there are some who can and will pick up a shovel, but I think they will be in short supply.
Not that they are useless, but they are useless to a struggling and handicapped society. Otherwise, they would be able to employ their own doctors. Doctors without borders gets their funding and resources outside the society they are servicing which is what makes them useful. They provide services which the local society cannot muster on their own. Take away that outside funding, and it's a cold hard truth that those communities will soon revert back to no or very limited doctors.
You cannot recall citizens united. What you have to do is amend the constitution to exclude the free speech you do not agree with and allow the government to regulate it. It is the entire reason why the amendment process was put into the constitution- so you didn't have to go around violating it and people's rights when you all the sudden think someone is outdated.
The same thing can be said about lobbyist and term limits. The constitution doesn't allow the government to put limits outside what is already spelled out in it on those who serve in the government. This is done for good reason too. Lobbyist are in the same lines of speech as citizens united.
If your funny bone is that screwed up, sure. But this story is about using an old outdated operating system still being used and having to pay extra for support because it is so old. So please relax before your panties get knotted so tight you have to buy new ones. It's just a joke- a joke about windows the good versions.
If the FAA doesn't have rules on it, they are not or should not be allowed to regulate it. The entire concept of freedom in the US is that we are free to do whatever unless a law stops us or we encroach on others freedoms. It is not that we have to look to some government authority for permission when they have nothing banning or barring it.
think about the effect of a widespread Armed protest movement;
We almost got to find out.Well, not exactly in the sense you were thinking. I know of about 200 people who went to this guy's ranch just to target practice over the few weeks. Well, I don't know all of them, I know people who know them and they told me about them.
Sure linux and OSS is great on your home computer or web-server but it doesn't have the applications like windows does. Sometimes there are comparable applications available but for the most part, off the shelf programs with support is what is needed for most all government agencies larger then a city government.
I'm not saying that cannot change, open software can become just as polished and available but until it does or until the windows software has cross platform support, windows seems to be the only viable options for a working government.
Not any reason. Just any reason based on his participation in any recognized political process- whether that is publicly or privately advocating a position or candidate, donating to some position or candidate, or being a candidate him/herself or voting or not voting.
It's not a matter of taking complaints, it is a matter of being penalized for participating or failing to participate in any political process that is the basis of freedom in the US.
Yes, because what they think is not necessarily what is real. I think Unicorns are neat. See where I'm going?
It's the process not the end result that is most important. If you allow any law to be left undefended, you allow any law to be left undefended. Suppose there is a law that says all traffic not separate by a solid wall median must come to a complete stop when school buses are loading and unloading children unless in designated zones which have a speed limit of 20mph or less. Now suppose everyone but a trucking company supports this law but it makes them late for their deliveries so they pay a governor a lot of campaign contributions and then take the law to court claiming it unconstitutionally impedes their right to travel and participate in commerce.
So if the governor decides not to defend this law because for 500K he became convinced it was unconstitutional, it is gone and likely not to be brought back without a lot of hassle. But if the court says it is unconstitutional, then it is. If they do not, you have a chance to make your case again to the appeals court and maybe even to the supreme court. But you cannot step in for the governor and say wait a minute, this is a good law because children sometimes dart in front of traffic right after exiting school buses. It has to be the state or government doing it.
There is even a flash demo if you want to check it out. Just don't use that combo they made a few years ago which took what they thought was the best parts of Windows CE, Windows ME and Windows NT and created Windows CEMeNT (as hard as a rock and dumber than a brick).
Even though it seems like it sometimes, this is not some third world dictatorship. We only criminally prosecute people who took part in the claimef violation of the law- not someone whos connectiom seems to be innocent of the violation but not likable for whatever reason. To do otherwise goes against ghe entire concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Lol.. so we are a lawless nation unless someone can get elected to fix something. kind of like term limits in california and the current governor. You would hope an election would fix it but you would likely be wasting your time.
But not only that, someone will have to duplicate all the effort and expense to redo the law and it will have to go up against court precedent which will make it unenforcable until it is changed. Precedent also limits the ability to challenge the premise of the nullification of the law. It may be that some laws could never be recreated unless a judge ignored precrdent. It opens a can of worms that are dificult to gather up and put a lid back on
The default needs to be uphold the law and then maybe we wouldn't have a billion laws on the books not being enforced and every politicial screaming there should be a law about that whenever it is broken.
Ok, one more time for the slow among us. The Sjpreme court's take on it is not impkrtant. Its the failure to defend a law passed by the people that is. Any law can be defeated if no one defends it and the state has a duty to do so but faied to do it.
Imagine the sstate's smoking regulation being challenged by big tobacco and no the governor decides not to defend it. Imagine the off shord drilling ban having the same circumstances. They win by default and the law is overturned even if everyone in the state unanimousely voted for it.
There are public statements to the effect that the company encourages activism, political participation and much of the conditions were created by employees.
You essentially have the company saying they aren't going to stop employees from ragging on him.
It doesn't matter what the supreme court did. If the state is the only entity that can defend a challenge to a law or prop voted into effect by the people, then when the state refuses to defend it, the challenge will always prevail.
Suppose the people voted for a law that said ever citizen of the state shall be entitled to a two year degree at any state college and i challenge it, if the state doesb't defend the law, i automatically win. Now the law is void~ not because of my posistion being the right one, but because the state never officially said i was wrong. Now imagine any law and any governor who orders the state to act or not.
Lol.. looks like you got a friend or teo following you around.
I did do some property damage- eggs a principle's house for suspending me over something i had nothing to do with. He called me into the office and said if i knew who did it, tell them thanks because the siding needed painted anyways and now his insurance would pay for it. So i superglued all the locks on his house. He left me alone.
But yes, i know what you mean about kids these days. A lot of the trouble i got into was from listening to stories my father's old school chims told me. Big mistake, he knew immediately who how and when. Yes, they seem to be starting earlier now but that could be because of 24 hour news and think of the children. What i mean is, it coild have been happening but we didn't hear about it.
Although, we did start a camp fire in the woods oneday and a neighbor kid was there who ended up burning down 3 or 4 acres of corn imitating us. He was 5 or 6 at the time. Lucky he didn't get hurt. Perhaps the kids are gettong exposed earlier and monkey see monkey do before they think of it on thier own.
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt it would get that far. Without anyone to objecct, they would win on summary which is before any of that is introduced
No one has to buy the judge off. The judge is only allowed to consider evidence presented so if no one said this is good law and defended it, the judge could only consider the evidence challenging it. Its a done deal.
Also, people with injured kids would not have standing. They can petition a new law but the challenge would be done and over with. You cannot challenge a court ruling on just any grounds. Once the ruling is made, there has to be some sort of error or prescribed circumstance to challenge the ruling. They may however be able to sue the state if it doesn't claim soverein immunity.
And as long as you let them, the best you can hope for is a reach around.
Sometimes government tries to overstep its bounds, its not easy but standing up to them when it happens needs to be a priority.
A better way would be to just use the phone's blue tooth and pair it to the car. Allow the driver to enter a code and use the phone for keyless entry and such as an incentive. But just have the car tell the phone when to go into a relaxed mode or whatever when the vehicle is in gear and going over a certain speed.
There can be an override on the phone so if your a passenger, it doesn't matter and of course you can cancel the pairing. Most people will forget about the phone's features unless they want to make a call or text or whatever. But they won't feel the need to answer texts or phone calls so it will largely be transparent to them and avoid the most usages.
There is quite a bit of those canned goods so maybe quickly means something like a year or so then.
if a large portion of the population is killed, food won't be an immediate concern as the canned goods on the shelf of homes and super markets will last for years while production gets sorted out.
But as others have pointed out, if the clothing isn't stored properly, it won't last as long. Before air conditioning and modern insulation, cedar chests were the bees knees in providing protection for clothing and papers. so all is not lost and it won't be all that bad.
Lol.. No, I am around a lot of different people. They are generally lazy or think manual labor is beneath them. That may change with starvation, but I think it is much more likely that they will just take your food while you do all the work.
Well, you also have to remember that the 20th century was a time when many people knew a shovel was used for more then cleaning crap up from your dog and wasn't afraid to use it for those other purposes. That is widely missing in today's society I think.
Sure, there are some who can and will pick up a shovel, but I think they will be in short supply.
In sorts, yes.
Not that they are useless, but they are useless to a struggling and handicapped society. Otherwise, they would be able to employ their own doctors. Doctors without borders gets their funding and resources outside the society they are servicing which is what makes them useful. They provide services which the local society cannot muster on their own. Take away that outside funding, and it's a cold hard truth that those communities will soon revert back to no or very limited doctors.
You cannot recall citizens united. What you have to do is amend the constitution to exclude the free speech you do not agree with and allow the government to regulate it. It is the entire reason why the amendment process was put into the constitution- so you didn't have to go around violating it and people's rights when you all the sudden think someone is outdated.
The same thing can be said about lobbyist and term limits. The constitution doesn't allow the government to put limits outside what is already spelled out in it on those who serve in the government. This is done for good reason too. Lobbyist are in the same lines of speech as citizens united.
If your funny bone is that screwed up, sure. But this story is about using an old outdated operating system still being used and having to pay extra for support because it is so old. So please relax before your panties get knotted so tight you have to buy new ones. It's just a joke- a joke about windows the good versions.
I have not heard of any that have completely moved off though. I know a couple are trying and failing at the moment.
If the FAA doesn't have rules on it, they are not or should not be allowed to regulate it. The entire concept of freedom in the US is that we are free to do whatever unless a law stops us or we encroach on others freedoms. It is not that we have to look to some government authority for permission when they have nothing banning or barring it.
At least one court thinks the same too That article will probably explain it better then I can.
We almost got to find out.Well, not exactly in the sense you were thinking. I know of about 200 people who went to this guy's ranch just to target practice over the few weeks. Well, I don't know all of them, I know people who know them and they told me about them.
There isn't really a viable alternative is why.
Sure linux and OSS is great on your home computer or web-server but it doesn't have the applications like windows does. Sometimes there are comparable applications available but for the most part, off the shelf programs with support is what is needed for most all government agencies larger then a city government.
I'm not saying that cannot change, open software can become just as polished and available but until it does or until the windows software has cross platform support, windows seems to be the only viable options for a working government.
Not any reason. Just any reason based on his participation in any recognized political process- whether that is publicly or privately advocating a position or candidate, donating to some position or candidate, or being a candidate him/herself or voting or not voting.
It's not a matter of taking complaints, it is a matter of being penalized for participating or failing to participate in any political process that is the basis of freedom in the US.
Yes, because what they think is not necessarily what is real. I think Unicorns are neat. See where I'm going?
It's the process not the end result that is most important. If you allow any law to be left undefended, you allow any law to be left undefended. Suppose there is a law that says all traffic not separate by a solid wall median must come to a complete stop when school buses are loading and unloading children unless in designated zones which have a speed limit of 20mph or less. Now suppose everyone but a trucking company supports this law but it makes them late for their deliveries so they pay a governor a lot of campaign contributions and then take the law to court claiming it unconstitutionally impedes their right to travel and participate in commerce.
So if the governor decides not to defend this law because for 500K he became convinced it was unconstitutional, it is gone and likely not to be brought back without a lot of hassle. But if the court says it is unconstitutional, then it is. If they do not, you have a chance to make your case again to the appeals court and maybe even to the supreme court. But you cannot step in for the governor and say wait a minute, this is a good law because children sometimes dart in front of traffic right after exiting school buses. It has to be the state or government doing it.
You mean install the really good edition?
There is even a flash demo if you want to check it out. Just don't use that combo they made a few years ago which took what they thought was the best parts of Windows CE, Windows ME and Windows NT and created Windows CEMeNT (as hard as a rock and dumber than a brick).
Even though it seems like it sometimes, this is not some third world dictatorship. We only criminally prosecute people who took part in the claimef violation of the law- not someone whos connectiom seems to be innocent of the violation but not likable for whatever reason. To do otherwise goes against ghe entire concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Lol.. so we are a lawless nation unless someone can get elected to fix something. kind of like term limits in california and the current governor. You would hope an election would fix it but you would likely be wasting your time.
But not only that, someone will have to duplicate all the effort and expense to redo the law and it will have to go up against court precedent which will make it unenforcable until it is changed. Precedent also limits the ability to challenge the premise of the nullification of the law. It may be that some laws could never be recreated unless a judge ignored precrdent. It opens a can of worms that are dificult to gather up and put a lid back on
The default needs to be uphold the law and then maybe we wouldn't have a billion laws on the books not being enforced and every politicial screaming there should be a law about that whenever it is broken.
Ok, one more time for the slow among us. The Sjpreme court's take on it is not impkrtant. Its the failure to defend a law passed by the people that is. Any law can be defeated if no one defends it and the state has a duty to do so but faied to do it.
Imagine the sstate's smoking regulation being challenged by big tobacco and no the governor decides not to defend it. Imagine the off shord drilling ban having the same circumstances. They win by default and the law is overturned even if everyone in the state unanimousely voted for it.
There are public statements to the effect that the company encourages activism, political participation and much of the conditions were created by employees.
You essentially have the company saying they aren't going to stop employees from ragging on him.
Look up something called constructive discharge.
California counts it the same as being fired if the case is strong enough. I guess the question might be how vindictive he might be.
It doesn't matter what the supreme court did. If the state is the only entity that can defend a challenge to a law or prop voted into effect by the people, then when the state refuses to defend it, the challenge will always prevail.
Suppose the people voted for a law that said ever citizen of the state shall be entitled to a two year degree at any state college and i challenge it, if the state doesb't defend the law, i automatically win. Now the law is void~ not because of my posistion being the right one, but because the state never officially said i was wrong. Now imagine any law and any governor who orders the state to act or not.
Lol.. looks like you got a friend or teo following you around.
I did do some property damage- eggs a principle's house for suspending me over something i had nothing to do with. He called me into the office and said if i knew who did it, tell them thanks because the siding needed painted anyways and now his insurance would pay for it. So i superglued all the locks on his house. He left me alone.
But yes, i know what you mean about kids these days. A lot of the trouble i got into was from listening to stories my father's old school chims told me. Big mistake, he knew immediately who how and when. Yes, they seem to be starting earlier now but that could be because of 24 hour news and think of the children. What i mean is, it coild have been happening but we didn't hear about it.
Although, we did start a camp fire in the woods oneday and a neighbor kid was there who ended up burning down 3 or 4 acres of corn imitating us. He was 5 or 6 at the time. Lucky he didn't get hurt. Perhaps the kids are gettong exposed earlier and monkey see monkey do before they think of it on thier own.