YSK call your house rep. They’re more likely to answer. Also call your state reps first. Most issues are handled on a state level, not federal, and state house reps tend to be the most accessible.
YSK call your house rep. They’re more likely to answer. Also call your state reps first. Most issues are handled on a state level, not federal, and state house reps tend to be the most accessible.
I wonder if someone will make a modern version, someday, for a common cheaper rifle like a Ruger American or Savage 110.
The friend of certainty is time. One day perhaps then we won’t even call ourselves Americans. I doubt the 1860s will happen again anytime soon. Maybe something closer in scale to Blair Mountain.
Look to history. We’ve had two. Look at the words explaining the necessity of independence in the declaration of independence. Those were not hollow words but detailed a long series of abuses. Then look to the causes of the Civil War. A perfidious institution anathematic to the very core ideal of the nation, that all men are created equal.
Our times doubtless have our problems but the do not meet nearly the standard set in the past.
Great question. In theory/practice you can just shut up from square one. But asserting your rights by doing so in clear unambiguous terms for is advisable. Judges understand someone saying “I wish to invoke my right against self incrimination as protected in the 5th amendment” better than the do pure silence.
7th amendment applies to civil suits. Judges may when common law doesn’t govern. But that’s limited. And criminal defendants must consent to bench trial by not contesting any of the facts.
Movies are works of fiction not law. In America if you choose to temporarily waive your right to silence and speak to police you may at any point reassert that right.
I couldn’t blame cinematographers for attempting to tell a story. But they are artists not lawyers.
You may talk to police that way in America but any good lawyer will tell you not to because the strength of the fact that your silence can’t be used against you often will offend out weigh any defense you might argue.
When guilt must be proven absence of evidence is the defendant’s friend.
As an American this is an interesting comment.
Traditional American understandings agree with the notion of innocent until proven guilty and that rights exist regardless of accusations. But here it is not a judge but a jury of your peers who decides the facts based on evidence shown to them. Here judges decide matters of law not fact.
(Unless you choose to have a judge rule on the facts (likely because you are probably unpopular in your community because of the nature of the accusations and you feel it’d be more fair for a judge to decide the fact in your eyes))…
I’m not sure what an exception could look like that wouldn’t swallow the rule. Maybe a requirement for a minimum of a certain sq footage of undeveloped land. But that might not work in areas where many lots have a small amount of habitat land that together forms a larger habitat.
I think it might have merit on a municipal level in very urban areas but not on a state or national basis because of this.
wild misinformation ads would be OK too…
Yes. Because the government is not the supreme arbiter of truth. If someone wants to put out an advert saying the sky is yellow they can. Our society functions on the principle that an open market of ideas will result in the best ideas prospering while a closed market of ideas would stifle new better ideas.
This might not be the reason but in the US a lot of land is privately owned undeveloped land. If you taxed undeveloped land you may incentivize the destruction of habitats of a lot of wildlife.
Another replyer alluded to this but if every plant can spread its seeds X feet then by cutting like this you increase the total surface area the plants are able to spread to. Increasing the natural regrowth rate.
The MAGA movement of 2016 billed itself as an anti establishment movement. Contrasting itself from traditional Republicans and the Democratic party. It promised to “Drain the Swamp”.
Their success is indictive of a discontent with the state of the government at the time. They targeted the blue collar demographic promising stances on issues that’d help them.
Here’s a video on a county that voted Democrat from 1869-2016: https://youtu.be/yfxvHqTCy2w
Keep in mind you came to a left leaning platform with essentially no Trump supporters and asked why do people like Trump. Listen to what they cite not just us.
We have no clue where you are so we can’t give any good advice. For all we know you live in Elbonia and driving without a license gets you the guillotine.
But
Show up ~30 minutes early, there will likely be metal detectors and a line at them. If you are in line be ready when you get up front, if you need to empty your pockets do that before you are at the detector. This makes it faster for everyone.
Showing up early will also give you time to find your courtroom in the building. It also will let you watch the court for a few minutes before your time to shine.
Turn your phone off. Court house rules might require you leave it outside.
Dress appropriately, a polo should be fine. Any collared shirt tucked in with pants and closed toed shoes will show you put some effort into dressing yourself. No hats unless you’ve got to for your religion.
It’s the judge’s courtroom don’t interrupt them. Don’t lie. And being on your best behavior starts the moment you step onto the lot not when you enter the room, be polite to court staff as well.
Read the ticket front and back for specific instructions. Check the court website to see if there’s any announcements that you should be aware of (like local rules).
Don’t listen to other people’s advice on how you should plead. We don’t know the facts of your case. Most people here aren’t lawyers. Nothing here is legal advice.
Not sure on all the specifics of CA’s admittance structure, beyond they banned race base admission in the '90s in favor of a system that guaranteed admissions to top percentile students.
But post Students for Fair Admissions DEI measures are still ok. Schools can’t use race alone as a plus or minus but they may choose to favor those from disadvantaged neighborhoods, 1st generation college students, and even good essays that share someone’s experience being a race.
Admiralty law, and it stems from it being one the few areas of jurisdictions covered by federal courts per Art 3 sec 2 of the US Constitution.
The chances of that happening to the average person are close to zero.
That’s the whole point. People don’t watch the news to hear “dog bites man” they watch it to hear “man bites dog”.
No one wants to watch a 2-3 hr long movie about someone’s regular Tuesday at the office they want to watch something that doesn’t happen everyday like an adventure, the perfect couple meeting, or the world ending.
Just feel it should be pointed out that money isn’t the only way to contribute. Time is another. Volunteer hours are important for many charitable organizations too.
Big win for consumers, at least in the US. People tend to do better in courts here than they do in arbitration (where one side pays the judge(arbitrator)).
Don’t hate it.
A blockchain being essentially a public ledger.
It’s a good concept that will doubtlessly have several if not many practical uses. I think any hatred it gets is just because like every new thing hucksters try and brand it as the cure to all ills to make a buck.