The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
4th amendment does not ban any laws of any kind.
It's not that it's illegal to prosecute it. As far as I know, Congress could easily pass a law to create such a crime, without running afoul of the Constitution (assuming they wrote their law to skirt around 1st-amendment protections at least. which is a big if.)
Which Congress has done in the past on several occasions--the Alien and Sedition Act comes to mind immediately, which was used to jail a Congressman from Vermont for criticizing the President. In every case the law was generally instituted in an emergency and repealed shortly thereafter (usually as soon as the opposition party gained power).
Because you don't understand how the Constitution works at all? I mean, the President does EVEN LESS legislating than Congress after all, so if you voted for Obama to get legislation...well, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Many of the regs do exactly nothing. Not because they were intended that way, but because the people writing them are blisteringly incompetent. We're talking "Guam tipping over" incompetent.
Religion had nothing to do with it. More than 1 Jewish Grandparent in Nazi Germany meant you were Jewish, even if you were Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, or whatever.
At a certain point in their evolution the difference becomes negligible in practice (Stalin's Russia circa 1950 vs Mussolini's Italy in 1930--Hitler is a bad example, Nazism was pseudo-fascist compared to Franco and Mussolini).
Historically though, the processes of the power shift and its political goals have been radically different between the two (Lenin's Russia in 1919 vs Mussolini's Italy in 1920 or Franco's Spain in 1936).
What is going on in the US (and has been going on for decades) is neither Fascism nor Communism, but some new god awful middle ground of bureaucratic authoritarianism (who cares if its a corporate bureaucracy or a governmental one--it's still bureaucratic tyranny). I chalk it up to the slight perserverance of the Constitution, even in its modern neutered form.
Radical changes to the socio-political structure just can't happen quickly in the US, so instead of the violent shifts that occurred in Europe in the 20s and 30s overnight where either the Fascist or Communist faction gained control very quickly just haven't happened. Instead, in the US both factions have opted to race each other in a death march to the total strangulation of the country, hoping to be able to blame the other over the ashes and then take over.
Why should intangible assets be treated differently???
Because the law says so currently. Plain and simple. I'm not saying the current law is good or (morally) right, but it is what it is. I'm not talking about what the law SHOULD be. That is a different conversation.
An auction with one bidder? What are you talking about? Eminent domain is when the government takes (by force), but still reimburses. Where the hell would an auction fit in?
I think you should learn what eminent domain is. He's talking about the price at which the government reimburses the company it is seizing the patent from.
Yes, but apparently you do not. Government owned industry is Communism, not Fascism. Industry owned government is Fascism. The difference is significant.
No, they're not from the same people, with the exception of SOME Catholics. And yes, pro-life really just means baby. 90% of anti-abortion persons I know are also pro-death penalty.
Things weren't so sane back then. The above was literally a witch hunt. As in, they were first accused of being witches and flying around at night on broomsticks by the schizophrenic mother of one of the children. Only later when she also claimed they were molesting her son did the police start doing anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh....what?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
4th amendment does not ban any laws of any kind.
It's not that it's illegal to prosecute it. As far as I know, Congress could easily pass a law to create such a crime, without running afoul of the Constitution (assuming they wrote their law to skirt around 1st-amendment protections at least. which is a big if.)
Which Congress has done in the past on several occasions--the Alien and Sedition Act comes to mind immediately, which was used to jail a Congressman from Vermont for criticizing the President. In every case the law was generally instituted in an emergency and repealed shortly thereafter (usually as soon as the opposition party gained power).
Because you don't understand how the Constitution works at all? I mean, the President does EVEN LESS legislating than Congress after all, so if you voted for Obama to get legislation...well, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Many of the regs do exactly nothing. Not because they were intended that way, but because the people writing them are blisteringly incompetent. We're talking "Guam tipping over" incompetent.
Guess that implies that I really don't care what ethnicity you are or what religion you have, whatsoever.
No, it mostly implies that you don't care about knowing history. :P (Does the smiley make me less snarky, more, or just retarded ;) ?)
Religion had nothing to do with it. More than 1 Jewish Grandparent in Nazi Germany meant you were Jewish, even if you were Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, or whatever.
I thought the canon explanation was that she was essentially part-human due to the nature of the machine that created her.
Then why did she lose the bit of herself, the gold breath, just like the doctor when he regenerates?
She was dead.
Who strangely didn't change form when she regenerated...
Having recently had dinner in LA with a lovely Welshman, don't tell him Wales isn't the third country in Britain.
For that matter, don't tell the UK Government: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/geography/uk_countries.asp
Because this wasn't a crime scene?
Classified material is already an exception to the public domain rule. Don't be a moron.
At a certain point in their evolution the difference becomes negligible in practice (Stalin's Russia circa 1950 vs Mussolini's Italy in 1930--Hitler is a bad example, Nazism was pseudo-fascist compared to Franco and Mussolini).
Historically though, the processes of the power shift and its political goals have been radically different between the two (Lenin's Russia in 1919 vs Mussolini's Italy in 1920 or Franco's Spain in 1936).
What is going on in the US (and has been going on for decades) is neither Fascism nor Communism, but some new god awful middle ground of bureaucratic authoritarianism (who cares if its a corporate bureaucracy or a governmental one--it's still bureaucratic tyranny). I chalk it up to the slight perserverance of the Constitution, even in its modern neutered form.
Radical changes to the socio-political structure just can't happen quickly in the US, so instead of the violent shifts that occurred in Europe in the 20s and 30s overnight where either the Fascist or Communist faction gained control very quickly just haven't happened. Instead, in the US both factions have opted to race each other in a death march to the total strangulation of the country, hoping to be able to blame the other over the ashes and then take over.
Jeebus christ. You must be trolling me. In an eminent domain seizure the property is take by the government, for the government.
Why should intangible assets be treated differently???
Because the law says so currently. Plain and simple. I'm not saying the current law is good or (morally) right, but it is what it is. I'm not talking about what the law SHOULD be. That is a different conversation.
An auction with one bidder? What are you talking about? Eminent domain is when the government takes (by force), but still reimburses. Where the hell would an auction fit in?
All drug research is already government funded. The drug companies spend more on marketing than they do R&D.
Imprisoning a burglar is the prescribed remedy according the law. Revoking IP rights is not prescribed by the law. That's the difference.
I think you should learn what eminent domain is. He's talking about the price at which the government reimburses the company it is seizing the patent from.
Yes, but apparently you do not. Government owned industry is Communism, not Fascism. Industry owned government is Fascism. The difference is significant.
No, they're not from the same people, with the exception of SOME Catholics. And yes, pro-life really just means baby. 90% of anti-abortion persons I know are also pro-death penalty.
Pages for the legislators' pleasure.
Ah, but the corporation can.
He accidentally the dependent clause.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial
Things weren't so sane back then. The above was literally a witch hunt. As in, they were first accused of being witches and flying around at night on broomsticks by the schizophrenic mother of one of the children. Only later when she also claimed they were molesting her son did the police start doing anything.
They still have call boxes on the sides of the freeway.