I have a peeping Tom, who happens to be my next door neighbor.
He has a 25 year prison record, anyways...
He has been constantly staring out his windows directly into my house everyday for hours at a time for the last year and a half.
I finally took action and put a non working camcorder in the window facing their house to make him stop.
Immediately I got the desired result and he stopped and a week after that put his blinds down. After about 3 weeks, One morning I woke up to find duck tape all over the window where my camera is at. He actually tresspassed and put that crap all over my outside windows.
Stupidly I did not call the police(Don't ask me why), and I just took it down and saved it, and put a note up on my window informing him that I have been in touch with the police and that I got him on tape putting the duck tape up there. I told him"Let it go, I don't want anymore trouble!!".
He took the note, but then he actually called us and asked us to take the camera down, me and my Mother. He said he promised he would stop if we did. We ofcourse told him they were staying up and we are within our rights,.
Then he put a note up on his window next morning, (which I did not bother to go over and read) because I am not gonna go over to the guys property, and by then it was getting pretty childish.
All I want is for this creep to leave me alone.
Anyways, all was good, and it's been a couple of months, so I relaxed, and took the camera down for a couple of days, BIG MISTAKE.
On Sunday, we noticed a netflix DVD in the mail. Mail does not come on Sundays, and we take the mail everyday. It had been opened, completely, somebody obviously opened it(him). We never miis mail.
So, he's going into our mailbox now, so I FINALLY, called the police and filed a report. The cop said he would talk to him, and aske him to leave me alone. Who knows, this guy has an obscession and I don't think hes gonna stop. When I have money I'm getting some real working cameras. The guys obviously challenging me.
First, if he is looking into your windows from his house, then put up curtains or blinds.
Second, by aiming a camcorder at his house, even if it if not working, YOU are technically violating HIS rights to privacy.
Third, unless you saw him open your mail you will not be able to prove it was him.
There is little the police can do as you have no proof of his wrongdoing. The police may talk to him but, that is all they can do. A restraining order may not be granted because again there is no proof.
All I can suggest is to cover your windows and put a lock on the mailbox. Record all incidents of harassment and stay away from him. Do not confront him.
What is your question?
You have filed a report and the Cop has spoke to the guy. You need to get a real-working camera for Evidence.
Good Luck; this guy does seem like a creep.
Monday, March 30, 2009
How does Los Angeles County twin towers jail (huge dorm) compare to other jails and/or prison?
I've spent about a week in L.A. County at the Twin Towers central jail... was wondering how it compares to other jails/prisons?
If you like pink underwear,(men too)bologna (green I am told) no coffee,dirty magazines get into the Maricopa Co jail in Phoenix Az
If you like pink underwear,(men too)bologna (green I am told) no coffee,dirty magazines get into the Maricopa Co jail in Phoenix Az
If th chain of custody form was not signed when evidence was taken to be tested would that evidence be inadmis?
Maybe, maybe not, depending on the circumstances.
But it would definitely be suspicious and a good defense attorney could probably cast enough doubt on it that the evidence would be dismissed by the jury.
If you have a good lawyer....yes
But it would definitely be suspicious and a good defense attorney could probably cast enough doubt on it that the evidence would be dismissed by the jury.
If you have a good lawyer....yes
The Kray Twins:Is it true that everyone was scared of them in jail,during the
I've been reading Norman Parker's "Parkhurst Tales"and he says that everybody respected them!True or false?
true. some people werent so fond of dem but they did respect them.
true. some people werent so fond of dem but they did respect them.
I think everything that I dislike should be illegal. Any thoughts?
Even if something has no direct effect on me, if I don't like it, it should be illegal.
Hey! I don't like that kind of talk!
That's right. So I want Rush Limbaugh, people who talk too loud on their cell phones, people who text while driving, people who get obnoxious when drunk and every show on Faux "News" to be illegal. GREAT idea!
I think the "I don't like it, so it shall be illegal" school of legal thought has been already taken by your congress.
Congratulations! you're a Republican.
What is your opinion on gay marriage?
You sound like the democrat congress. If I was playing Jeopardy my answer would be. " Who is Nancy Pelosi"
I imagine that there are lots of people who agree with you.
Hey! I don't like that kind of talk!
That's right. So I want Rush Limbaugh, people who talk too loud on their cell phones, people who text while driving, people who get obnoxious when drunk and every show on Faux "News" to be illegal. GREAT idea!
I think the "I don't like it, so it shall be illegal" school of legal thought has been already taken by your congress.
Congratulations! you're a Republican.
What is your opinion on gay marriage?
You sound like the democrat congress. If I was playing Jeopardy my answer would be. " Who is Nancy Pelosi"
I imagine that there are lots of people who agree with you.
60 Oakland residents rally support for Levell Mixon who Killed 4 police officers?
It seemed like most of Oakland residents feel this way. The day of the funerals NO ONE in Oakland were on the overpasses paying repects to the police officers motercades as they passed. ALL the surrounding cities had people on the overpasses and the sides of the road showing their respects. Castro Valley, Hayward, Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, Berkeley, Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Danville showed their respect.
What do you think should be done with this city.
Quit policing them and let them all kill each other
The overwhelming, vast majority of Oakland residents felt truly sad for the officers, and support their police department. Out of a city of 350,000, police haters could only muster 60 to protest. WOW, now there's proof of your claim.
In fact, the funeral for the cops were attended by 20,000 inside the arena, and another 12,000 spillover in the Coliseum.
Don't ever allow the vocal malcontents of puny proportions to ever disguise the real affection citizens have for their police.
The only people who hate police are the very people the police were intended to protect us from: Punks, lawbreakers and evil..
Put a wall around it and let them run things the way they want, without police.
Typical...
Now that is what im talking about. LEgalize drugs so all those people arent comitting crimes. they cant make money and no one gets killed. only reason some one makes money of illegal drugs is because they are illegal so u can sell them for a high price.
Good for them. Those pigs don't deserve respect.
What do you think should be done with this city.
Quit policing them and let them all kill each other
The overwhelming, vast majority of Oakland residents felt truly sad for the officers, and support their police department. Out of a city of 350,000, police haters could only muster 60 to protest. WOW, now there's proof of your claim.
In fact, the funeral for the cops were attended by 20,000 inside the arena, and another 12,000 spillover in the Coliseum.
Don't ever allow the vocal malcontents of puny proportions to ever disguise the real affection citizens have for their police.
The only people who hate police are the very people the police were intended to protect us from: Punks, lawbreakers and evil..
Put a wall around it and let them run things the way they want, without police.
Typical...
Now that is what im talking about. LEgalize drugs so all those people arent comitting crimes. they cant make money and no one gets killed. only reason some one makes money of illegal drugs is because they are illegal so u can sell them for a high price.
Good for them. Those pigs don't deserve respect.
Does CSI and current technology ...?
do away with good old fashioned investigative techniques like lineups, and interrogations and gut level thinking?
NO
those things you mentioned is what collects the evidence to shut a case beyond shadow of doubt
Forensic science has to cooraborate the story that is put together as a result of investigation.
Actually, lineups are losing a lot of credibility as more and more data comes out on the percentage of false identifications. But investigation is always the main driving force. CSI is just one part of it.
No. The line ups and confessions pretty much seal the deal. Crime Scene investigation is a great foundation to determine which suspects to interview and is the icing on the cake.
Alot of crimes are solved with interrogations, line ups are unreliable and should never be used in my opinion.
NO.
um
NO
those things you mentioned is what collects the evidence to shut a case beyond shadow of doubt
Forensic science has to cooraborate the story that is put together as a result of investigation.
Actually, lineups are losing a lot of credibility as more and more data comes out on the percentage of false identifications. But investigation is always the main driving force. CSI is just one part of it.
No. The line ups and confessions pretty much seal the deal. Crime Scene investigation is a great foundation to determine which suspects to interview and is the icing on the cake.
Alot of crimes are solved with interrogations, line ups are unreliable and should never be used in my opinion.
NO.
um
What do you think about legalizing drugs in Mexico?
Laws in Mexico are like prison walls in kid's games. They're only there in your imagination.
i think all drugs should be legal everywhere. then reputable companies would sell them instead of street vendors. criminals wouldnt get rich, gangs wouldnt fight over drug territory, police wouldnt violate peoples rights in an attempt to get the drugs, and there would be less overdoses because the drugs would be of known content and purity. also, the people would save billions in tax money.
As bad an idea there as it is in the USA.
i think all drugs should be legal everywhere. then reputable companies would sell them instead of street vendors. criminals wouldnt get rich, gangs wouldnt fight over drug territory, police wouldnt violate peoples rights in an attempt to get the drugs, and there would be less overdoses because the drugs would be of known content and purity. also, the people would save billions in tax money.
As bad an idea there as it is in the USA.
What should I do, I don
I heard that my friend was going to press charges because I was "harrasing" him and bcuz i impersonated a cop I got this 2day in utube frm him
"it's not me pressing charges it's the police cause on multiple occassions you said you were federal staff to gain service and that's impersonation of a police officer , your perants will be summond to court if the american police see that needed. i was ordered by my perants to deliver printed evidence to tauranga's police station
please phone your local police station if u have any inquires as i wasen't given a case number so i assume i have no control over this one
; ( turns out i'm not the only one u've done this 2 there's members from ctgnz (gta modding) who have evidence 2 but they are willing to discard it for you. u should proberly stay on their good sides.
Tenex_North will protect you from getting a criminal record so u can still become a police officer when u grow up , they'll email you if a case is launched
that's as far as i'm will to protect you as a minor."
wht shud i do?
Frankly they would not bother to pursue a case internationally with minors, and if they did the contact would not be through email or youtube. Get real, if there was such a case, the police would have all your contact information from already from your computer ID, there would be no need for youtube contact, this kid is merely trying to get you to stop your contact with them.
I don't know why "Question G" has got a thumbs-down for making a very good point.
Because of your poor grammar, spelling and use of text short cuts it is almost impossible to know exactly what you are trying to say.
You are not likely to be sent to prison as you are too young, you also seem to be very immature. I think the best thing you can do is speak to your parents.
If you really can't speak to your parents then there is something wrong and you should speak to your schoolteacher.
Learn to write in true english with proper grammar, you should be sent to prison for that mess you just wrote.
However I think he is lying to you, and with the current economic situation they will not press serious charges on someone that cannot even be legally charged as an adult.
yer in the doghouse with water and doggie snacks fer 2 years, no tv,goofin on the net,now,take remedial classes,talk with a school counselor,and when that doesn't work,look at what you eat that makes your judgement all wacko,stay off the dope too
He contacted you via youtube to tell you that charges are being pressed against you? Methinks you have nothing to worry about.
You should clean up the grammar so that people can actually read this.
"it's not me pressing charges it's the police cause on multiple occassions you said you were federal staff to gain service and that's impersonation of a police officer , your perants will be summond to court if the american police see that needed. i was ordered by my perants to deliver printed evidence to tauranga's police station
please phone your local police station if u have any inquires as i wasen't given a case number so i assume i have no control over this one
; ( turns out i'm not the only one u've done this 2 there's members from ctgnz (gta modding) who have evidence 2 but they are willing to discard it for you. u should proberly stay on their good sides.
Tenex_North will protect you from getting a criminal record so u can still become a police officer when u grow up , they'll email you if a case is launched
that's as far as i'm will to protect you as a minor."
wht shud i do?
Frankly they would not bother to pursue a case internationally with minors, and if they did the contact would not be through email or youtube. Get real, if there was such a case, the police would have all your contact information from already from your computer ID, there would be no need for youtube contact, this kid is merely trying to get you to stop your contact with them.
I don't know why "Question G" has got a thumbs-down for making a very good point.
Because of your poor grammar, spelling and use of text short cuts it is almost impossible to know exactly what you are trying to say.
You are not likely to be sent to prison as you are too young, you also seem to be very immature. I think the best thing you can do is speak to your parents.
If you really can't speak to your parents then there is something wrong and you should speak to your schoolteacher.
Learn to write in true english with proper grammar, you should be sent to prison for that mess you just wrote.
However I think he is lying to you, and with the current economic situation they will not press serious charges on someone that cannot even be legally charged as an adult.
yer in the doghouse with water and doggie snacks fer 2 years, no tv,goofin on the net,now,take remedial classes,talk with a school counselor,and when that doesn't work,look at what you eat that makes your judgement all wacko,stay off the dope too
He contacted you via youtube to tell you that charges are being pressed against you? Methinks you have nothing to worry about.
You should clean up the grammar so that people can actually read this.
Can you be arrested for kicking someone out of your car on the highway?
i really wanted to kick my ex-girlfriend out of my car while driving down the highway. just pull over and make her get out. she told me that she had cheated on me with a former friend of mine. she was 20, as was i. however, i did not out of fear of having some kind of charges brought up against me, and drove her home, and out of my life. could there have been any legal ramifications for this? just want to know for future reference.
Had doing so placed her in danger, then yes, it is possible. You did the right thing. Take comfort in that.
There could be under any conditions, if she were to be harmed due to your actions. So it really depends on what kind of highway you are talking about and what the location was.
No they could not do anything to you. But the tricky part is actually getting her to get out of the car. If you touch her then something could happen.
Out of a stationary car, no. Out of a moving car, yes.
Had doing so placed her in danger, then yes, it is possible. You did the right thing. Take comfort in that.
There could be under any conditions, if she were to be harmed due to your actions. So it really depends on what kind of highway you are talking about and what the location was.
No they could not do anything to you. But the tricky part is actually getting her to get out of the car. If you touch her then something could happen.
Out of a stationary car, no. Out of a moving car, yes.
Game Warden/ Conservation Officer?
I'm interested in the career of maybe being a Game Warden/ Conservation Officer. If there are any on here or any helpful information i would really like to hear it.
Thanks
Most require atleast a bachelors degree and you must have a clean criminal record. This is a very competetive career field, I have applied several times for game warden in my state an have been turned down because this career has an extremely low turnover rate. After getting turned down I became a park ranger which is a little easier to get due to the fact that there are a lot more positions avaliable. Park ranger is also avalible on a local, state, or federal position. I do federal and have full ferderal law enforcement authority and love my job.
go for it.
Thanks
Most require atleast a bachelors degree and you must have a clean criminal record. This is a very competetive career field, I have applied several times for game warden in my state an have been turned down because this career has an extremely low turnover rate. After getting turned down I became a park ranger which is a little easier to get due to the fact that there are a lot more positions avaliable. Park ranger is also avalible on a local, state, or federal position. I do federal and have full ferderal law enforcement authority and love my job.
go for it.
We bought a small store and viewed a theft on camera, can we approach the person another day in the store?
We would like to know if we can prosecute even though the person wasn%26#039;t caught with merchandise or at the time of the theft. We have video, but nothing more.
Yes, you can. But if the person frequents your store you MIGHT want to tell them that you have video of them shoplifting and offer them the chance to remedy the situation. You aren%26#039;t under any obligation to do this, but it might turn out better for everyone. It is up to you.
Don%26#039;t corner them, use force, or confront them angrily.
Delay prosecuting. Ask the party to come to your place of business if you know how to get ahold of them. If not they will be back. A simple question of %26quot;do you pay for this or do I pusue it with the police?%26quot; will be enough. I know you don%26#039;t want to hear this but sometimes theft is a necessity for survival. Try to look at the big picture. When I was a boy my dad worked at a supermarket. The manager was constantly bringing people in to the office for theft questioning. 90% of the time it was something the perp did not want to do. Be human .......... wear their shoes for a day.
Yes you can......
call the police and give them the video.
call the police and give them the video
%0D%0A
Yes, you can. But if the person frequents your store you MIGHT want to tell them that you have video of them shoplifting and offer them the chance to remedy the situation. You aren%26#039;t under any obligation to do this, but it might turn out better for everyone. It is up to you.
Don%26#039;t corner them, use force, or confront them angrily.
Delay prosecuting. Ask the party to come to your place of business if you know how to get ahold of them. If not they will be back. A simple question of %26quot;do you pay for this or do I pusue it with the police?%26quot; will be enough. I know you don%26#039;t want to hear this but sometimes theft is a necessity for survival. Try to look at the big picture. When I was a boy my dad worked at a supermarket. The manager was constantly bringing people in to the office for theft questioning. 90% of the time it was something the perp did not want to do. Be human .......... wear their shoes for a day.
Yes you can......
call the police and give them the video.
call the police and give them the video
%0D%0A
If you caught a piece of sh@t breaking into your vehicle?
would you have the right to blast them. I have always wanted to get a 9MM. Now i think i will, just a matter of time. My jeep was stolen last night. I think if i would have caught them in the act, my adrenaline would have kicked in an i would have wound up ripping their head off. I could even see there footprints in the snow.
Use a baseball bat on their knees, and /or arms. This way they can have time to think about what they did, while they lay in the prison hospital. And if you do it right, you can give them a limp to help them remember the mistake. I have been robbed, and I will stop them if they ever try again. These idiots are violating the rights of others, so why should we care about their rights.
In Toledo Ohio last year a gentlemen there shot two perpetrators breaking into his vehicle. No charges were ever filed against him even though they died. I believe anyone and everyone should have the right to blast these scum bags when they break into others homes, vehicles or where ever. I would definitely do what you were thinking of doing!
Unless you are threatened, if you shoot them, you go to jail. Longer than they will for stealing your stuff.
No.
Enjoy your time in prison.....................
how can Feces break into you Car? thats impossible!
Use a baseball bat on their knees, and /or arms. This way they can have time to think about what they did, while they lay in the prison hospital. And if you do it right, you can give them a limp to help them remember the mistake. I have been robbed, and I will stop them if they ever try again. These idiots are violating the rights of others, so why should we care about their rights.
In Toledo Ohio last year a gentlemen there shot two perpetrators breaking into his vehicle. No charges were ever filed against him even though they died. I believe anyone and everyone should have the right to blast these scum bags when they break into others homes, vehicles or where ever. I would definitely do what you were thinking of doing!
Unless you are threatened, if you shoot them, you go to jail. Longer than they will for stealing your stuff.
No.
Enjoy your time in prison.....................
how can Feces break into you Car? thats impossible!
Should Mexico be legalized?
Would it cut down on the drug cartel violence and lower prices?
I'm pretty sure Mexico is currently legalized... ;)
I think you meant "Should Marijuana be legalized?, Would it cut down on....". If that is the question, the answer is difficult.
Would it cut down on cartel violence and lower prices?
Absolutely. During prohibition in the USA, when alcohol was banned, organized crime really took hold. Prices of booze went up, and criminals saw huge profits. Crime also skyrocketed. The reason is this; If you go to Best Buy and give them $2000 for a TV to be delivered, and they don't do it, you sue them. What does a drug dealer do when $2000 dollars worth of Marijuana is not delivered? They have to use force to reconcile the dispute. They obviously can't sue. So if you legalize marijuana, then American business people will start growing and selling it, albeit with heavy government oversight. Violence relating to that particular drug will be almost non-existent. Look at, for instance, Adderall. Highly addictive, high demand, yet I've not heard of any drive by shootings at Merck or Glaxo Smith Kline. As for prices, they would DEFINITELY drop. Depending on the level of taxation and regulation, the prices would be similar to tobacco.
However, while crime relating to Marijuana would drop, the cartels would simply move on to another illegal product that has demand, and the crime involving that product will rise.
Another effect of legalizing marijuana would be the effects on the current marijuana economy. Billions of dollars are spent every year in the USA fighting Marijuana. Once legalized, what will all those Law Enforcement officers do? Some will undoubtedly switch to whatever product the cartels switch to, but there will surely be job loss.
Another effect, and this is just my personal theory, is what will happen in inner city neighborhoods. It's a lot easier to by pot in a ghetto than in a suburb. This brings money from more affluent areas into poorer areas. That money is then redistributed to the local economy through inner city businesses that are likely employ inner city poor.
Having said all that, I personally feel marijuana and all other substances should be completely deregulated. Not for any crime or financial reasons, but simply on the premise of freedom. Who owns my body? If I own it, shouldn't I be the lone decider of how it is treated? While I am opposed to recreational use of marijuana (Smoking is BAD for you!), I am much more opposed to people telling me what I can and cannot put into my body.
Man that was lengthy. Hope that helps!
in 1996 america was given a plan to pass on to mexico when they elected vincencio fox in that plan was the legalization of weed and the decriminalizing of cocaine weed was to be industrialize and taxed coke dealers were to be fined there were other issues discussed then as well...as usual the politicians took what they wanted and threw away the rest...and if mexico is plunge into a civil war maybe then they will understand that this plan could have averted that
No, Mexico (and Canada) should both be deemed 'illegal' to the U.S.......!!
Close the Borders and get tough on Trade, And get rid of Clinton's NAFTA Agreements, they are hurting this Country badly....!!
Sure, legalize Mexico but prohibit the border
When was Mexico illegal?
If you mean legalize weed, yes.
you got that right...
yup!
I'm pretty sure Mexico is currently legalized... ;)
I think you meant "Should Marijuana be legalized?, Would it cut down on....". If that is the question, the answer is difficult.
Would it cut down on cartel violence and lower prices?
Absolutely. During prohibition in the USA, when alcohol was banned, organized crime really took hold. Prices of booze went up, and criminals saw huge profits. Crime also skyrocketed. The reason is this; If you go to Best Buy and give them $2000 for a TV to be delivered, and they don't do it, you sue them. What does a drug dealer do when $2000 dollars worth of Marijuana is not delivered? They have to use force to reconcile the dispute. They obviously can't sue. So if you legalize marijuana, then American business people will start growing and selling it, albeit with heavy government oversight. Violence relating to that particular drug will be almost non-existent. Look at, for instance, Adderall. Highly addictive, high demand, yet I've not heard of any drive by shootings at Merck or Glaxo Smith Kline. As for prices, they would DEFINITELY drop. Depending on the level of taxation and regulation, the prices would be similar to tobacco.
However, while crime relating to Marijuana would drop, the cartels would simply move on to another illegal product that has demand, and the crime involving that product will rise.
Another effect of legalizing marijuana would be the effects on the current marijuana economy. Billions of dollars are spent every year in the USA fighting Marijuana. Once legalized, what will all those Law Enforcement officers do? Some will undoubtedly switch to whatever product the cartels switch to, but there will surely be job loss.
Another effect, and this is just my personal theory, is what will happen in inner city neighborhoods. It's a lot easier to by pot in a ghetto than in a suburb. This brings money from more affluent areas into poorer areas. That money is then redistributed to the local economy through inner city businesses that are likely employ inner city poor.
Having said all that, I personally feel marijuana and all other substances should be completely deregulated. Not for any crime or financial reasons, but simply on the premise of freedom. Who owns my body? If I own it, shouldn't I be the lone decider of how it is treated? While I am opposed to recreational use of marijuana (Smoking is BAD for you!), I am much more opposed to people telling me what I can and cannot put into my body.
Man that was lengthy. Hope that helps!
in 1996 america was given a plan to pass on to mexico when they elected vincencio fox in that plan was the legalization of weed and the decriminalizing of cocaine weed was to be industrialize and taxed coke dealers were to be fined there were other issues discussed then as well...as usual the politicians took what they wanted and threw away the rest...and if mexico is plunge into a civil war maybe then they will understand that this plan could have averted that
No, Mexico (and Canada) should both be deemed 'illegal' to the U.S.......!!
Close the Borders and get tough on Trade, And get rid of Clinton's NAFTA Agreements, they are hurting this Country badly....!!
Sure, legalize Mexico but prohibit the border
When was Mexico illegal?
If you mean legalize weed, yes.
you got that right...
yup!
Is ding dong ditching illegal, dang?
Hhaha, in the state of WISCONSIN_!
i just did it last night, it was one of the best nights of my life. Hahaha(:
yes, but it's almost impossible to get caught, unless your retarded, cause they have to prove it was you who trespassed
Yes its Trespassing. You have WAY too much time on your hands, try playing "Patty Cake"
I don't think so, I've done it tthousands of times(:
Lol
i just did it last night, it was one of the best nights of my life. Hahaha(:
yes, but it's almost impossible to get caught, unless your retarded, cause they have to prove it was you who trespassed
Yes its Trespassing. You have WAY too much time on your hands, try playing "Patty Cake"
I don't think so, I've done it tthousands of times(:
Lol
Caught stealing ?
Ok so, I live in Toronto Canada and My friend and I was caught stealing at Sephora. I know it was stupid of us. This is the last time we
ll ever do anything like that again! They called our parents, called the police and said they were gonna fine us. They said we can't go back to the store for a year if we do it'll be trespassing. What else is going to happen to us? Do we have a criminial record? It was our first time stealing. They did not take pictures or finger prints.
No you do not have a criminal record. If you don't do it again, nothing else will happen to you.
However, your names are probably entered into Toronto Police Service's computer system so that if you are caught again for anything, the police will know that you've already been caught stealing once.
Shoplifting is a crime, and if you continue to do it, its only a matter of time before you DO get a criminal record.
ll ever do anything like that again! They called our parents, called the police and said they were gonna fine us. They said we can't go back to the store for a year if we do it'll be trespassing. What else is going to happen to us? Do we have a criminial record? It was our first time stealing. They did not take pictures or finger prints.
No you do not have a criminal record. If you don't do it again, nothing else will happen to you.
However, your names are probably entered into Toronto Police Service's computer system so that if you are caught again for anything, the police will know that you've already been caught stealing once.
Shoplifting is a crime, and if you continue to do it, its only a matter of time before you DO get a criminal record.
Help with an inspection problem?
the plumbing inspector told me the problem is
(Back water Valve problem)
What does this mean?
Are you having drain problems? Back water valve sounds like the "check" valve that prevent sewage from feeding back into your home in a flood situation. Get it fixed if that's the problem. It's there for a reason.
(Back water Valve problem)
What does this mean?
Are you having drain problems? Back water valve sounds like the "check" valve that prevent sewage from feeding back into your home in a flood situation. Get it fixed if that's the problem. It's there for a reason.
Why do other people get arrested for you know they went to the cop just trying to get around and?
they were trying to get around the cop and get arrested why thats strange how?
If you're asking what I think you're asking... probably interfering with an investigation / obstructing justice, something along those lines.
i don't understand the question, you're sentences aren't constructed well.... to possibly answer you're question, what police need is probable cause. if a police officer has probable cause they may arrest any individual
Don't understand the question. Sorry.
If you're asking what I think you're asking... probably interfering with an investigation / obstructing justice, something along those lines.
i don't understand the question, you're sentences aren't constructed well.... to possibly answer you're question, what police need is probable cause. if a police officer has probable cause they may arrest any individual
Don't understand the question. Sorry.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Is this not a contradiction or what?
I caught portions of President Obamas address to the USA last night. One thing in particular caught my attention. President Obama keeps adamantly stating we are all in this together, no one person is to blame, more than the other We need to stop blaming each other and work togetherblah blah blah. Then he goes on to state repeatedly I was not in office when all of this happened, you cant blame me I was not here when the decisions were made.WTFexcuse me is that a contradiction to the truest sense of the word. Youre telling us to be patient that we are all in this together, its all of our faults and then you are shirting responsibility by your constant reminders that you were not president when all of this went down! To quote Elle Woods from the movie Legally Blonde, Am I on glue? or did he just contradict the *UCK out of himself? Please someone justify this for me?
Typical arrogant asshole politician.
Well, it seems clear to me. He's saying that he is no more to blame than anyone else. He shares the blame in the same proportions as everyone else and no more or less.
I also noticed he continues to blame Bush. This mess is his now and he has got to man up and take responsibility. Until he does, he gets no respect from me.
He's really full of it, he's at least as bad a liar as Bush.
I actually enjoy the way he keeps sticking it to the bush administration... it's a good thing!
You are absolutely correct!
I think you're on glue.
he will stop saying "dont blame me for this" when the republicans Stop blaming him for this..
basically he's saying that he wont blame the republicans once they stop blaming him
after all we all know who's fault this is....BUSH
Typical arrogant asshole politician.
Well, it seems clear to me. He's saying that he is no more to blame than anyone else. He shares the blame in the same proportions as everyone else and no more or less.
I also noticed he continues to blame Bush. This mess is his now and he has got to man up and take responsibility. Until he does, he gets no respect from me.
He's really full of it, he's at least as bad a liar as Bush.
I actually enjoy the way he keeps sticking it to the bush administration... it's a good thing!
You are absolutely correct!
I think you're on glue.
he will stop saying "dont blame me for this" when the republicans Stop blaming him for this..
basically he's saying that he wont blame the republicans once they stop blaming him
after all we all know who's fault this is....BUSH
State of WI layoff/cut hours question regarding unemployment.?
My company is holding a meeting today at 2 and it's been said that they're talking about cutting a day out of the work week (32 hours lost per month) and asking some to do a voluntary lay-off.
Financially the lay-off would benefit me more IF I can collect unemployment. No matter what I cannot live off of 32 hours per week as my husband is in college and we have two kids in daycare. Anyone know what my rights are here? If I do take the lay-off can I collect unemployment? Do I have to cut my hours if they try to make me?
If you do the voluntary lay off, I don't think you can claim unemployment. But if it is involuntary, then you can. If you are classified a full-time worker, and they are shortening their work week, they are liable for the lay-off time if they did it without your consent. If you consent, then you lose any claim to unemployment.
Check on the website; google Wisconsin Unemployment Insurance. It will get you to their site, and they have all of the information that is needed, and you will be able to file a claim on there as well.
Good luck!!
Get a second job! My goodness, you want to ad to our already stressed out unemployment system? At least you are working and that is something to be humbled by and proud of.
It sounds like you don't want to work because unemployment benefits last about 90 days and are only 1/3 of your pay. Can you live on that? It would seem you make more money working by losing only 4 days per week.
If you want to quit, than do. But don't use this as an excuse to stay home and collect another taxpayer check.
Financially the lay-off would benefit me more IF I can collect unemployment. No matter what I cannot live off of 32 hours per week as my husband is in college and we have two kids in daycare. Anyone know what my rights are here? If I do take the lay-off can I collect unemployment? Do I have to cut my hours if they try to make me?
If you do the voluntary lay off, I don't think you can claim unemployment. But if it is involuntary, then you can. If you are classified a full-time worker, and they are shortening their work week, they are liable for the lay-off time if they did it without your consent. If you consent, then you lose any claim to unemployment.
Check on the website; google Wisconsin Unemployment Insurance. It will get you to their site, and they have all of the information that is needed, and you will be able to file a claim on there as well.
Good luck!!
Get a second job! My goodness, you want to ad to our already stressed out unemployment system? At least you are working and that is something to be humbled by and proud of.
It sounds like you don't want to work because unemployment benefits last about 90 days and are only 1/3 of your pay. Can you live on that? It would seem you make more money working by losing only 4 days per week.
If you want to quit, than do. But don't use this as an excuse to stay home and collect another taxpayer check.
What law needs to be repealed right away?
The stimulus bill.
MN state law that says you cannot cross state lines with a duck on your head. I've always wanted to do this, but I can't because of this law.
MN state law that says you cannot cross state lines with a duck on your head. I've always wanted to do this, but I can't because of this law.
HR1388
If you read Rahm Emmanuel'sl book (Obama's Chief of Staff) "The Plan" he talks of, and has vocally espoused, mandatory volunteer work from ALL Americans:
50 hours per year for kids
100 hour per year for teens
3 months boot camp in barracks for ages 18-25
3 YEARS sum total for all adults and seniors
1 year ago the Obama campaign scrubbed an obamayouth website. Michelle Obama has been involved with "Public Allies" for a long time andplans on running these "mandatory volunteerism" programs for youth.
Well, as a parent, I want no part of this for my kids OR myself.
Are they going to punish us? Do we have to leave the country?
Rahm is a dual citizen of Israel where they do this.
Oh...You are talking about the "Hitler Youth Bill"...
This is the same thing the NAZI's/Communists/
Mao did to their young people...
The earlier you start Brainwashing the
easier it is to Control the Masses...
Hence the 3 months of Boot Camp...
I'm not familiar with this 3rd world atrocity foolishness, but I'm not surprised by whose idea it was. Judging by history of those that share the same gang bang mindset or should I say inner city low life thugs. I'm sure we will be dragged into the street and shot. Seems there's a fool in charge and a Group of spineless leaders doing everything it says
Read the bill, dear. There is NOTHING within the bill that even suggests any mandatory service. Allbut 3 Republicans also voted for this bill. You should also read the Constitution...specifically the 13th Amendment.
sounds like it to me.. and **** rahm, and obama for that matter, why should we have to volunteer for anything.. stupid people, and of course these are the people who want to make everyone train to be a civilian reaction force.. whats the national guard for?
Look under section 125.
Anyone under this "mandatory' work cannot perform any relegious activities. Talk about killing your freedom of worship.
Its in there folks, look it up.
You need to read the bill... it pertains to FUNDING for schools in relation to volunteerism. There is no 'demand' on the public.
There's no such thing as a "mandatory volunteer"...its one or the other...DUH!
Yes thats what it means.......also you will be beaten with a stick......... now shut up.dumb dumb
50 hours per year for kids
100 hour per year for teens
3 months boot camp in barracks for ages 18-25
3 YEARS sum total for all adults and seniors
1 year ago the Obama campaign scrubbed an obamayouth website. Michelle Obama has been involved with "Public Allies" for a long time andplans on running these "mandatory volunteerism" programs for youth.
Well, as a parent, I want no part of this for my kids OR myself.
Are they going to punish us? Do we have to leave the country?
Rahm is a dual citizen of Israel where they do this.
Oh...You are talking about the "Hitler Youth Bill"...
This is the same thing the NAZI's/Communists/
Mao did to their young people...
The earlier you start Brainwashing the
easier it is to Control the Masses...
Hence the 3 months of Boot Camp...
I'm not familiar with this 3rd world atrocity foolishness, but I'm not surprised by whose idea it was. Judging by history of those that share the same gang bang mindset or should I say inner city low life thugs. I'm sure we will be dragged into the street and shot. Seems there's a fool in charge and a Group of spineless leaders doing everything it says
Read the bill, dear. There is NOTHING within the bill that even suggests any mandatory service. Allbut 3 Republicans also voted for this bill. You should also read the Constitution...specifically the 13th Amendment.
sounds like it to me.. and **** rahm, and obama for that matter, why should we have to volunteer for anything.. stupid people, and of course these are the people who want to make everyone train to be a civilian reaction force.. whats the national guard for?
Look under section 125.
Anyone under this "mandatory' work cannot perform any relegious activities. Talk about killing your freedom of worship.
Its in there folks, look it up.
You need to read the bill... it pertains to FUNDING for schools in relation to volunteerism. There is no 'demand' on the public.
There's no such thing as a "mandatory volunteer"...its one or the other...DUH!
Yes thats what it means.......also you will be beaten with a stick......... now shut up.dumb dumb
Why do the US media twist issues to benefit Corporations or political leaders that the media support?
Example:
#1. Supply and Demand theory for Oil Price
#2. Iraq war
#3. Bonus to AIG executives
All undermining the United States of America
Ninety percent of the media is controlled by right wing corporations and conservatives with a need to have a king rather than a president.
First you have to understand the #1 of the media, to sell advertising to companies that you'll purchase goods from.
Exxon makes a ton of money, they also do a lot of advertising...you don't bite the hand that feeds.
AIG did a TON of advertising over the last 18 months, more than I think they ever did before (or at least I noticed). I work in the insurance field and pay attention to insurance commercials. You don't have to think very hard to figure that one out.
Iraq war was very unpopular to be against because they were linked so heavily to 9/11 in the run-up to war. You don't piss off the consumers of your rag and lose advertisers.
Because mainstream media has wanted a Dem in office for awhile now some in mainstream media are having morning meetings with some from the white house admin to go over things for the day like things to say and things to focus on.
like how mainstream media went after Rush then mainstream media focused on AIG executives to deflect from how the admin was handling the economy.
Because the media is a multimillion dollar business. Their primary goal is to get high Nielsen rating and sell advertisement. Sometimes they tell the truth but more often they sensationalize news in order to make it more interesting. Further have you noticed who the TV media hire as news person? Most female news person are attractive enough to be movie stars. Check out Fox News and CNN. Even the field women reporters are not bad looking at all.
If you are referring to the entertainment part, they don't want to lose ad revenue.
If you are talking about the news part, they don't.
LOL - you think the media SUPPORTS this sh!t? Not one single thing on your list has the support of the media. Sometimes not even Fox News.
You need to listen more carefully before posting this crap.
because the corporations basically own the entire media so they can regulate what gets talked about and what gets left out
Because the media is part of the corporations.
That is what happens when Capitalism makes its way to Government and the media.
none of the above, they twist it to get ratings to sell commericals.
huh
#1. Supply and Demand theory for Oil Price
#2. Iraq war
#3. Bonus to AIG executives
All undermining the United States of America
Ninety percent of the media is controlled by right wing corporations and conservatives with a need to have a king rather than a president.
First you have to understand the #1 of the media, to sell advertising to companies that you'll purchase goods from.
Exxon makes a ton of money, they also do a lot of advertising...you don't bite the hand that feeds.
AIG did a TON of advertising over the last 18 months, more than I think they ever did before (or at least I noticed). I work in the insurance field and pay attention to insurance commercials. You don't have to think very hard to figure that one out.
Iraq war was very unpopular to be against because they were linked so heavily to 9/11 in the run-up to war. You don't piss off the consumers of your rag and lose advertisers.
Because mainstream media has wanted a Dem in office for awhile now some in mainstream media are having morning meetings with some from the white house admin to go over things for the day like things to say and things to focus on.
like how mainstream media went after Rush then mainstream media focused on AIG executives to deflect from how the admin was handling the economy.
Because the media is a multimillion dollar business. Their primary goal is to get high Nielsen rating and sell advertisement. Sometimes they tell the truth but more often they sensationalize news in order to make it more interesting. Further have you noticed who the TV media hire as news person? Most female news person are attractive enough to be movie stars. Check out Fox News and CNN. Even the field women reporters are not bad looking at all.
If you are referring to the entertainment part, they don't want to lose ad revenue.
If you are talking about the news part, they don't.
LOL - you think the media SUPPORTS this sh!t? Not one single thing on your list has the support of the media. Sometimes not even Fox News.
You need to listen more carefully before posting this crap.
because the corporations basically own the entire media so they can regulate what gets talked about and what gets left out
Because the media is part of the corporations.
That is what happens when Capitalism makes its way to Government and the media.
none of the above, they twist it to get ratings to sell commericals.
huh
Can anyone recomend me a good immigration lawyer in Houston?
usually they erase comments with referrals (someone "reported" my answer last time i recomended someone... so we'll see)... there is a guy in San antonio who is awesome and will do long distance cases. he has done some really outstanding work and will be courteous but up front and direct with you about everything and his consultation is super cheap (like 30 bucks i think). his name is simon azar-farr. i know it's not houston, but you would not be wasting time or money with this guy.
Whatever you do don't get Manuel Sols, he is just a con artist
Gonzelaz
Whatever you do don't get Manuel Sols, he is just a con artist
Gonzelaz
How is it that for people who want less Government intrusion wants the Govt to intervene?
on a woman's right to choose and if 2 consenting adults can get married?
I think that the people want the government to intervene when it is convenient for them. No one wants "big brother" poking his nose into every aspect of their life. They want to be free to do what they want, and run their business as they please...but yet, for example, when gas prices got to $4 a gallon, the public was suddenly screaming that the government needed to intervene to regulate these prices because we are so dependent on gas for our everyday living .
I think it all falls under a "big brother" kind of category...without the metaphore, you don't want your big brother being there every waking moment with his nose in your business, yet when the bully at school starts picking on you you want him to come to your rescue and look after your best interests so that you aren't hurt.
As a conservative, I find abortion the conservative choice BECAUSE it gets the government the hell out of private decision-making. Having said that, I don't want to see abortion used as a means of birth control, but I don't see why it should be outlawed again either.
As far as gay marriage, it won't affect my life one way or the other. I can go perfectly on about my day whether or not some hairy dude is rolling around with some other hairy dude across town. I just have better things to care about.
All non-libertarians want the same thing - - - - freedom to do what THEY want to do, but govt control over what they don't want other people to do.
The differences among non-libertarians reflect only the differences in what people want to do and the differences in what people don't want other people to do.
The only party that consistently applies the same principle across the board to all freedoms is the Libertarian Party.
Keep participating - the substantive political questions (i.e., the ones that aren't just rants about how Obama sux or Bush sucked) generally involve (a) both "sides" misunderstanding economic issues (because so few people actually take a course in economics) or (b) one side quoting John Stuart Mill and claiming to be for personal freedom on one "issue" while ignoring all the other "issues" on which he or she opposes personal freedom.
If it involves sex but no money, Dems want you to be free to do it but Reps don't.
If it involves money but no sex, Reps want you to be free to do it but Dems don't.
If it involves both money and sex, both Dems and Reps want it shut down.
And nobody does much to challenge them or to challenge the whole "left / right" paradigm.
Yet this is supposed to be the "land of the free, home of the brave."
Gay marriage is an attempt to infringe on the Church. To me, if two people want to get married via a cvil union as long as the state recognizes the union and allows the partners to get benefits I'm all for it. Just don't try to get into the Church. Roe v Wade was inteded to allow a rape victim to get an abortion but has been used as an excuse for women to not have to live with their "mistakes". I don't see the problem with overturning the abortion law if they allow women better access to controceptives.
The government can and does limit one's rights if it has a compelling interest in furthering a competing goal. For example, you do not have the right to "choose" whether or not you should rob a bank.
I want governmental protection for innocent human life from the instant of conception.
I want the government to defend the borders, deliver the mail, prevent crimes (such as murder - which addresses abortion) and not let judges demand that I spend my tax money on men marrying men and women marrying women.
If these are now fringe views then our country is far more damaged than even I am starting to believe.
I'm glad I'm not a younger man.
How is it that the same group of people that were worried about intrusion into their lives by "The Man" back in the sixties and seventies are now all consumed by creating more of the intrusion they were so opposed to?
Because the choice she is choosing in this case is death of a human being. This is not an idle choice like shaken or stirred, a life is terminated. Who intervenes for that life? No one should?
handouts are beneficial and, people who don't want their food stamps evoked because of committing crimes.
Not me I want the Government to shrink up like men do when they get in icy water.
You seems to tink that all conservatives are Christians
FAIL
Because they are hypocrites.
I think that the people want the government to intervene when it is convenient for them. No one wants "big brother" poking his nose into every aspect of their life. They want to be free to do what they want, and run their business as they please...but yet, for example, when gas prices got to $4 a gallon, the public was suddenly screaming that the government needed to intervene to regulate these prices because we are so dependent on gas for our everyday living .
I think it all falls under a "big brother" kind of category...without the metaphore, you don't want your big brother being there every waking moment with his nose in your business, yet when the bully at school starts picking on you you want him to come to your rescue and look after your best interests so that you aren't hurt.
As a conservative, I find abortion the conservative choice BECAUSE it gets the government the hell out of private decision-making. Having said that, I don't want to see abortion used as a means of birth control, but I don't see why it should be outlawed again either.
As far as gay marriage, it won't affect my life one way or the other. I can go perfectly on about my day whether or not some hairy dude is rolling around with some other hairy dude across town. I just have better things to care about.
All non-libertarians want the same thing - - - - freedom to do what THEY want to do, but govt control over what they don't want other people to do.
The differences among non-libertarians reflect only the differences in what people want to do and the differences in what people don't want other people to do.
The only party that consistently applies the same principle across the board to all freedoms is the Libertarian Party.
Keep participating - the substantive political questions (i.e., the ones that aren't just rants about how Obama sux or Bush sucked) generally involve (a) both "sides" misunderstanding economic issues (because so few people actually take a course in economics) or (b) one side quoting John Stuart Mill and claiming to be for personal freedom on one "issue" while ignoring all the other "issues" on which he or she opposes personal freedom.
If it involves sex but no money, Dems want you to be free to do it but Reps don't.
If it involves money but no sex, Reps want you to be free to do it but Dems don't.
If it involves both money and sex, both Dems and Reps want it shut down.
And nobody does much to challenge them or to challenge the whole "left / right" paradigm.
Yet this is supposed to be the "land of the free, home of the brave."
Gay marriage is an attempt to infringe on the Church. To me, if two people want to get married via a cvil union as long as the state recognizes the union and allows the partners to get benefits I'm all for it. Just don't try to get into the Church. Roe v Wade was inteded to allow a rape victim to get an abortion but has been used as an excuse for women to not have to live with their "mistakes". I don't see the problem with overturning the abortion law if they allow women better access to controceptives.
The government can and does limit one's rights if it has a compelling interest in furthering a competing goal. For example, you do not have the right to "choose" whether or not you should rob a bank.
I want governmental protection for innocent human life from the instant of conception.
I want the government to defend the borders, deliver the mail, prevent crimes (such as murder - which addresses abortion) and not let judges demand that I spend my tax money on men marrying men and women marrying women.
If these are now fringe views then our country is far more damaged than even I am starting to believe.
I'm glad I'm not a younger man.
How is it that the same group of people that were worried about intrusion into their lives by "The Man" back in the sixties and seventies are now all consumed by creating more of the intrusion they were so opposed to?
Because the choice she is choosing in this case is death of a human being. This is not an idle choice like shaken or stirred, a life is terminated. Who intervenes for that life? No one should?
handouts are beneficial and, people who don't want their food stamps evoked because of committing crimes.
Not me I want the Government to shrink up like men do when they get in icy water.
You seems to tink that all conservatives are Christians
FAIL
Because they are hypocrites.
Why won
from a corrupted US government
is any Republican going to answer the question?
he didn't say that the gov. couldn't own them too... which destroys 99 percent of your objections...
it says right to bear arms... so, why not?
I've never seen a nuke kill anyone on it's own...
someone has to lock in coordinates for the device, turn the key, then flip the lid and push the button...
nukes don't kill... people do...
Because that's one of the primary jobs of the Government -- safety.
And using sarcasm when talking about a corrupted US government doesn't quite work. Someone should nail the constitution to forehead using a $13,000 hammer and a $2,000 nail.
Nice try -- read a book, it'll keep you from making these mistakes in the future.
______________________________________...
"Today, how would conservatives shoot down Jets with hunting shut-guns or pistols"
Unless you're talking about drones, you have no case -- and even with them your claim is baseless b/c it would require counts of treason for U.S. soldiers to attack U.S. citizens at the direction of the government.
Again -- read some books...left to right, top to bottom.
The answer will be easily found in the US Constitution. One of the few areas of responsibility given to the Federal government is national defense. It seems foolish to strip them of that function and let them continue performing unconstitutional functions..
Because Conservatives believe in the constitution, and national defense is contained in the constitution.
Had you read the constitution at one point in your life, you may already know this.
You are assuming the military would support the socialist against American citizens...
Hopefully the military is made up mostly of conservatives...
Sour taco, you know there are douches which you can buy to take away that sour smell.
Those are offensive weapons. We have a right to our defensive weapons.
The sovereign States authorized the feds to defend the nation. the States and people may defend from an abusive go'vt
i am keeping my guns. barry and the dem's are supposed to protect you but i would not bet on it.
Those armaments are not constitutional
Because even the most Right wing of Conservatives realize that that is a bit overboard... :/
You need to step away from your parents computer and go back to your room.
Tax payers do own them.....
You're weird.
I can't afford them
Would be sweet though!
I would have the greatest fireworks show on the lake!
LOL.... you are funny... (And many conservatives are not getting the joke)
Or we could just buy a Congressperson?
is any Republican going to answer the question?
he didn't say that the gov. couldn't own them too... which destroys 99 percent of your objections...
it says right to bear arms... so, why not?
I've never seen a nuke kill anyone on it's own...
someone has to lock in coordinates for the device, turn the key, then flip the lid and push the button...
nukes don't kill... people do...
Because that's one of the primary jobs of the Government -- safety.
And using sarcasm when talking about a corrupted US government doesn't quite work. Someone should nail the constitution to forehead using a $13,000 hammer and a $2,000 nail.
Nice try -- read a book, it'll keep you from making these mistakes in the future.
______________________________________...
"Today, how would conservatives shoot down Jets with hunting shut-guns or pistols"
Unless you're talking about drones, you have no case -- and even with them your claim is baseless b/c it would require counts of treason for U.S. soldiers to attack U.S. citizens at the direction of the government.
Again -- read some books...left to right, top to bottom.
The answer will be easily found in the US Constitution. One of the few areas of responsibility given to the Federal government is national defense. It seems foolish to strip them of that function and let them continue performing unconstitutional functions..
Because Conservatives believe in the constitution, and national defense is contained in the constitution.
Had you read the constitution at one point in your life, you may already know this.
You are assuming the military would support the socialist against American citizens...
Hopefully the military is made up mostly of conservatives...
Sour taco, you know there are douches which you can buy to take away that sour smell.
Those are offensive weapons. We have a right to our defensive weapons.
The sovereign States authorized the feds to defend the nation. the States and people may defend from an abusive go'vt
i am keeping my guns. barry and the dem's are supposed to protect you but i would not bet on it.
Those armaments are not constitutional
Because even the most Right wing of Conservatives realize that that is a bit overboard... :/
You need to step away from your parents computer and go back to your room.
Tax payers do own them.....
You're weird.
I can't afford them
Would be sweet though!
I would have the greatest fireworks show on the lake!
LOL.... you are funny... (And many conservatives are not getting the joke)
Or we could just buy a Congressperson?
English people, are you for or against globalization?
what do you think about a global currency?
I am an American and I am strongly against globalization. I personally love the fact that everyone is different no matter where you go. I'm afraid that it may be a thing of the past, but the differences in cultures is a beautiful thing. I have been an American my whole life and it absolutely saddens me how everyone tries to dress like us, watch our movies, watch our television shows, listen to our music and knows everything that goes on here. I think that this is mainly a flaw in the information age, but that can be left up to debate. I am afraid that we are about ten years away from only being able to experience cultures in other nations is by going to their cultural centers...even in the villages in Africa, Southeast Asia and the Middle East.
And a global currency? Oh that's a lovely idea! It is inevitable as well. It will start with a global currency that is used just for trade amongst the banks and then the countries will adopt it. A global wage is next and global prices on good. I hope to god that I am not alive to see that. When that happens, there would be no point of living in the U.S. May as well go somewhere warm to live out your dying days.
What's English people? People speaks English? or British ?
I have read some of the countrys who adopted the Euro are not happy with the change so it probubly is not a good idea
Maybe
I am an American and I am strongly against globalization. I personally love the fact that everyone is different no matter where you go. I'm afraid that it may be a thing of the past, but the differences in cultures is a beautiful thing. I have been an American my whole life and it absolutely saddens me how everyone tries to dress like us, watch our movies, watch our television shows, listen to our music and knows everything that goes on here. I think that this is mainly a flaw in the information age, but that can be left up to debate. I am afraid that we are about ten years away from only being able to experience cultures in other nations is by going to their cultural centers...even in the villages in Africa, Southeast Asia and the Middle East.
And a global currency? Oh that's a lovely idea! It is inevitable as well. It will start with a global currency that is used just for trade amongst the banks and then the countries will adopt it. A global wage is next and global prices on good. I hope to god that I am not alive to see that. When that happens, there would be no point of living in the U.S. May as well go somewhere warm to live out your dying days.
What's English people? People speaks English? or British ?
I have read some of the countrys who adopted the Euro are not happy with the change so it probubly is not a good idea
Maybe
Are brass knuckles illegal?
If so, why is gun not illegal too.
Stuff like this baffles me.
they are illegal but big name companies sell them as "paper weights", and the reason they are illegal because the supreme court found that in the Constitution when it says the right to bare arms, that brass knuckles were not included as "arms"
yes they are illegal. guns.....the right to bear arms?
Stuff like this baffles me.
they are illegal but big name companies sell them as "paper weights", and the reason they are illegal because the supreme court found that in the Constitution when it says the right to bare arms, that brass knuckles were not included as "arms"
yes they are illegal. guns.....the right to bear arms?
Who has nothing but profound Confidence in this Usurper sitting in the White House,?
Or are things starting to clear up a little in the mud puddle.
I have absolutely No Confidence in Obama. He has done not a thing to
instill confidence in his programs or polices. He has cost my grand
children more than they could ever want to be held accountable for,
in his spending and draining the swamp activities of late. This man
keeps telling the country he is sure this will work, and he is sure this
will be right for the Nation., This from the same guy that voted Present
150 times or more. So NO I have no confidence in a man that can't
even fill Cabinet Seats with qualified competent tax paying people.
Poor dear. Don't worry, there's no usurper in the White House anymore. America finally voted him out last November. We DID have profound confidence that Bush would trash this country and our confidence CLEARLY was well-founded.
The same is true today: The majority of Americans have profound confidence, but this time we are confident Obama will lead us out of this nasty Bushmess. For sure I have it and I'm glad to see others here who share that confidence. Unfortunately, not enough of us write, too many of them do.
And yes, the Bushmess mud puddle is clearing up. So, again, don't worry. Let me reassure you, transparency in government is a GOOD thing. I know after 8 yrs of smoke and mirrors that's a hard thing to believe, but now that we finally have more transparency, things really are clearing up quite nicely, thank you.
Action is always better than sitting and hoping. You guys criticize Obama's "hope" message, but that is what Bush did for the last couple of years as the economy crumbled...sit by and "hope" that it turned around
OBAMA IS AN ILLEGAL USURPER
HE SAYS SO HIMSELF IN S.R. 511 WHICH HE COSPONSORED
A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN IS THAT CHILD BORN OF TWO US CITIZENS ON US SOIL
I do.
And the usurper was Bush, who has still not been impeached or prosecuted.
It's all hope, and wait and see.
I have absolutely No Confidence in Obama. He has done not a thing to
instill confidence in his programs or polices. He has cost my grand
children more than they could ever want to be held accountable for,
in his spending and draining the swamp activities of late. This man
keeps telling the country he is sure this will work, and he is sure this
will be right for the Nation., This from the same guy that voted Present
150 times or more. So NO I have no confidence in a man that can't
even fill Cabinet Seats with qualified competent tax paying people.
Poor dear. Don't worry, there's no usurper in the White House anymore. America finally voted him out last November. We DID have profound confidence that Bush would trash this country and our confidence CLEARLY was well-founded.
The same is true today: The majority of Americans have profound confidence, but this time we are confident Obama will lead us out of this nasty Bushmess. For sure I have it and I'm glad to see others here who share that confidence. Unfortunately, not enough of us write, too many of them do.
And yes, the Bushmess mud puddle is clearing up. So, again, don't worry. Let me reassure you, transparency in government is a GOOD thing. I know after 8 yrs of smoke and mirrors that's a hard thing to believe, but now that we finally have more transparency, things really are clearing up quite nicely, thank you.
Action is always better than sitting and hoping. You guys criticize Obama's "hope" message, but that is what Bush did for the last couple of years as the economy crumbled...sit by and "hope" that it turned around
OBAMA IS AN ILLEGAL USURPER
HE SAYS SO HIMSELF IN S.R. 511 WHICH HE COSPONSORED
A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN IS THAT CHILD BORN OF TWO US CITIZENS ON US SOIL
I do.
And the usurper was Bush, who has still not been impeached or prosecuted.
It's all hope, and wait and see.
Why are employees expected to be loyal to their employer?
could someone explain why employees are expected to be loyal to their employer; yet employers are not expected to reciprocate that loyalty?
That is very good question! Loyalty doesn't count for anything anymore. Employees are routinely fired for any reason or no reason at all. I worked in a factory put in 16 long years and was starting to show a little tread. The boss treated me like a piece of ****, and I was finally a victim of "reduction in force" 25 of us were selected,. The people that stick the knives are not you're straw boss. His job is to make your life miserable and write you up for serious reasons that may not even be true. His boss was leaning on my boss to thin out the loyal troops. When I was written up, I refused to sign the pack of lies. I was sent home for 3 days for insubordination, and of course ultimately dismissed. Just try getting another job when you are 55 and almost used up.
The key thing to remember is that you asked to work for them. They were never required to hire you. No one is required to provide you with a job. Employers generally are expected to reciprocate. They just aren't required to. If they don't, they will have high turnover of employees which hurts overall production and quality. If they treat their employees better, they will retain experienced employees for a long time.
I think loyalty in either direction is a thing of the past. Gone are the days where someone works for the same company for 40 years and then retires. Today a better offer comes along and people are gone.
My employer is loyal to me. If I felt it wasn't, I'd work somewhere else.
I am a valued employee, I have that power. :)
I'm guessing you work at Wal-Mart...just go and find another job.
you need to find a better job......then you'll understand....
That is very good question! Loyalty doesn't count for anything anymore. Employees are routinely fired for any reason or no reason at all. I worked in a factory put in 16 long years and was starting to show a little tread. The boss treated me like a piece of ****, and I was finally a victim of "reduction in force" 25 of us were selected,. The people that stick the knives are not you're straw boss. His job is to make your life miserable and write you up for serious reasons that may not even be true. His boss was leaning on my boss to thin out the loyal troops. When I was written up, I refused to sign the pack of lies. I was sent home for 3 days for insubordination, and of course ultimately dismissed. Just try getting another job when you are 55 and almost used up.
The key thing to remember is that you asked to work for them. They were never required to hire you. No one is required to provide you with a job. Employers generally are expected to reciprocate. They just aren't required to. If they don't, they will have high turnover of employees which hurts overall production and quality. If they treat their employees better, they will retain experienced employees for a long time.
I think loyalty in either direction is a thing of the past. Gone are the days where someone works for the same company for 40 years and then retires. Today a better offer comes along and people are gone.
My employer is loyal to me. If I felt it wasn't, I'd work somewhere else.
I am a valued employee, I have that power. :)
I'm guessing you work at Wal-Mart...just go and find another job.
you need to find a better job......then you'll understand....
Sunspot Activity and Global Cooling, why is the MSN ignoring this story?
1. 2008 was the least active year for sunspot activity since the beginning of the space
age.
2. With approximately 273 spotless days in 2008, this was the 2nd least active year since 1913.
3. 2009 is on track to exceed the number of spotless days that 2008 had.
3. Past periods where the sun has been this inactive have resulted in dramatic global cooling. The most famous being the Maunder minimum of 1645 - 17xx. The is believed to be either the cause or at least a major contributing factor to creating the "Little Ice Age".
I have been researching this subject for a few months now. Except for a number of scientific articles and publications, very little is available on this.
Scientists seem to unanimously agree that this "could" cause an ice age or a "little ice age" in the very near future with several scientific groups saying it has already begun.
So with this being perhaps the most important and consequential story in the modern age, why is the MSN ignoring it?
Can this really be all about politics and the politics of "man made global warming"?
My sources: NASA, www.spaceweather.com, multiple web sites and articels, multiple articles found under the search "spotless sun", "recent sunspot activity", "little Ice Age", "Maunder minimum" and others
This is more likely than global warming. Even today Montana, South and North Dakota, Nebraska are facing heavy ice in the rivers causing great problems. Blizzards and snow storms this year have caused much havoc in the Northeast with some reaching down to the South.
Regardless of the "political incorrectness" we are having severe weather or extreme weather conditions. Our hurricanes are worse. Our thunderstorms are worse. Our tornadoes are worse. Our floods are worse. Our lightning fires in California are a lot worse.
As the laws of mankind are rejected the laws of nature react. God set both sets of laws. Proverbs 26:2 "a curse without a cause does not come." Sin and the increase of sin causes the increase of many things negative.
There's an entire section for global warming related discussion
Home > Environment > Global Warming
The only reason to post such a question here is because you're ranting (against the Yahoo Answers TOS)
See the movie 'Knowing' starring Nicholas Cage and you'll understand why the MSN is 'ignoring' it.
age.
2. With approximately 273 spotless days in 2008, this was the 2nd least active year since 1913.
3. 2009 is on track to exceed the number of spotless days that 2008 had.
3. Past periods where the sun has been this inactive have resulted in dramatic global cooling. The most famous being the Maunder minimum of 1645 - 17xx. The is believed to be either the cause or at least a major contributing factor to creating the "Little Ice Age".
I have been researching this subject for a few months now. Except for a number of scientific articles and publications, very little is available on this.
Scientists seem to unanimously agree that this "could" cause an ice age or a "little ice age" in the very near future with several scientific groups saying it has already begun.
So with this being perhaps the most important and consequential story in the modern age, why is the MSN ignoring it?
Can this really be all about politics and the politics of "man made global warming"?
My sources: NASA, www.spaceweather.com, multiple web sites and articels, multiple articles found under the search "spotless sun", "recent sunspot activity", "little Ice Age", "Maunder minimum" and others
This is more likely than global warming. Even today Montana, South and North Dakota, Nebraska are facing heavy ice in the rivers causing great problems. Blizzards and snow storms this year have caused much havoc in the Northeast with some reaching down to the South.
Regardless of the "political incorrectness" we are having severe weather or extreme weather conditions. Our hurricanes are worse. Our thunderstorms are worse. Our tornadoes are worse. Our floods are worse. Our lightning fires in California are a lot worse.
As the laws of mankind are rejected the laws of nature react. God set both sets of laws. Proverbs 26:2 "a curse without a cause does not come." Sin and the increase of sin causes the increase of many things negative.
There's an entire section for global warming related discussion
Home > Environment > Global Warming
The only reason to post such a question here is because you're ranting (against the Yahoo Answers TOS)
See the movie 'Knowing' starring Nicholas Cage and you'll understand why the MSN is 'ignoring' it.
Why do so many liberals believe that?
all conservatives are rich, old, southern men? Wouldn't that be like most conservatives thinking that all liberals are west coast tree-hugging, veggie eaters?
Seriously, where do these crazy stereotypes come from? Neither party is made up of any one type of person. What do you think?
i think its just that there are a lot of small minded, uninformed, people who would rather stereotype than educate themselves to what each party actually stands for
All?? I don't believe that, nor do most liberals.
The FACT is, however, your party DOES indeed have a voting base of rural, white, middle and older aged men. 57 is the median age for Republican voters. I know there are also younger people and minorities, but when you look at any GOP rally, any GOP event, and the RNC's ceremony that took place last year, it isn't difficult to tell that minorities, young people, and women are poorly represented within your party.
I don't know why they think only conservatives or Republicans are rich.
I think it is a symptom that the lower socioeconomic democrats are unaware.
Democrats like the Clintons and the Kennedys are extremely wealthy and getting wealthier by the day.
Obama is wealthy and will soon be mega wealthy.
Actors, actresses and rock stars, a majority whom lean Democrat, are mega wealthy.
IMO, the wealthy democrats are manipulating the poor democrats for personal gain.
As for the other stereotypes. They are apparently rooted in ignorance. I am an independent conservative. I don't fit their stereotype.
IMO, the wealthy conservatives and Republicans want everyone to have a shot at being wealthy in a free market.
You're right, those stereotypes do NOT describe the constituency. However, I wouldn't completely dismiss those stereotypes to describe party platforms, agendas and the interests represented. Could we possibly 'remove the blinders' enough to see that if we don't fit the stereotype, then quite possibly (probably) the party agenda does not fit our own best interests? Hey, it would be a big step towards a critical look at the two party system and whose interests are truly being served.
Hint: Under the guise of representing US interests, they do not serve US the people.
FYI: The top 3 richest Senators are DEMOCRATS:
The top three wealthiest senators are Democrats: John Kerry of Massachusetts, with a net worth of at least $164 million; Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, with a net worth of at least $111 million, and John "Jay" Rockefeller of West Virginia, with an estimated net worth of at least $82 million.
Senate millionaires
John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399
Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016
John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018
Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025
Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109
Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey $17,789,018
John Edwards, D-North Carolina: $12,844,029
Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts: $9,905,009
Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico: $7,981,015
Bob Graham, D-Florida: $7,691,052
Ben Nelson, D-Nebraska: $6,267,028
Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota: $3,974,037
Harry Reid, D-Nevada: $1,500,040
Thomas Carper, D-Delaware: $1,482,017
Maria Cantwell, D-Washington: $1,264,999
Barbara Boxer, D-California: $1,172,003
Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana: $1,080,014
Bill Nelson, D-Florida: $1,073,014
*These figures are base estimates provided by senators on their financial disclosure forms.
I think that liberals believe whatever the media spoon feeds them. I am an educated female in the lower, lower middle class level ( no I do not work in a factory, hold a professional level job) and I am a conservative Republican because I am not rich enough to be a Democrat, or poor enough to benefit from the countless social welfare programs that they fund by taking more and more money out of my paycheck
I don't believe that and it's that knowledge that confounds me so much. They defend protections for the rich that they will ultimately have to pay for themselves. That's as baffling as a soldier who makes sure the enemy's weapons all have full magazines before a battle.
that is so NOT true
most Liberals believe that the majority of conservatives are Poor White Trailer Trash
---------------------
"stereotypes" ??
like Asian people don't drive well
or
black men are well endowed
or
white people can't dance
LOL - where do those crazy stereotypes come from ?
We don't think you're only rich, old, southern men....we know you're also poor, uneducated, gun-toting, bible-thumping, xenophobic, homophobic, red neck, morons....also.
Liberals don't think that all of you are rich old white men from the South we just KNOW that those are the people that run the party and come up with the tricks and lies to get you bunch of haters, bigots and morons to follow them.
True, just because members of a party in Congress are a certain way, doesn't mean the people they are supposed to represent are that way. But it's evident by the answers you are getting from both sides, that people are too stupid to realize that.
It is only logical that old, rich, white (southern?) men would vote conservative. The Conservative and Republican parties represent these people. The Liberal and Democratic parties represent everyone else (upper-middle to lower class).
I think they are crazy stereotypes. However, I think a lot of conservatives do view liberals as all west coast, tree-hugging, veggie-eating types.
Quit bothering me with your good reasoning. The next thing you know, you'll claim that all Muslims aren't terrorists. Everyone knows that stereotypes are always true.
I was raised in Chicago and I've always been conservative. My In-Law relatives are from the hills of Kentucky have always been democrats, most of them dropped out of school in 8th grade! My conservative family is all educated!.
I have never met a Liberal that thinks that. Most Liberals are astounded by the number of poor Republicans as well as the number of Republicans that are on welfare.
I agree, I'm a 16 year old boy, in a band, music is life, does drugs, drinks, loves girls with a passion, is athletic, and dirt poor.
And I'm a hardcore Republican!
Good day, Sir.
let them think that
by that logic all liberals are hollywood elitists that love to fellate each other
Conservatives are selfish folks that think only about themselves...Liberals are their brothers keepers
I agree with Brian. They don't actually think about anything. They only think and do what they're told.
I'm conservative, 24 years old, not rich yet, and a man, who lives in Indiana. So suck on that Delphi.
i don't. I have seen that most "blue" states have higher incomes than red states.
Because that is what they are told to believe..
Did you watch their convention? It was like playing "Where's Waldo" for a young minority.
You forgot 'white'. They think this because they're close-minded.
thats what they do
I like the way you think!
Well they are not but instead Liberals watch NBC, MSNBC and watch Universal Movies, and Conservatives watch FOX, Fox News, and 20th Century Fox Movies why because they control their Tundra that's right both Parties are ruled by the Media.
Take a closer look at the members of that party.
Where'd you get that one?
Seriously, where do these crazy stereotypes come from? Neither party is made up of any one type of person. What do you think?
i think its just that there are a lot of small minded, uninformed, people who would rather stereotype than educate themselves to what each party actually stands for
All?? I don't believe that, nor do most liberals.
The FACT is, however, your party DOES indeed have a voting base of rural, white, middle and older aged men. 57 is the median age for Republican voters. I know there are also younger people and minorities, but when you look at any GOP rally, any GOP event, and the RNC's ceremony that took place last year, it isn't difficult to tell that minorities, young people, and women are poorly represented within your party.
I don't know why they think only conservatives or Republicans are rich.
I think it is a symptom that the lower socioeconomic democrats are unaware.
Democrats like the Clintons and the Kennedys are extremely wealthy and getting wealthier by the day.
Obama is wealthy and will soon be mega wealthy.
Actors, actresses and rock stars, a majority whom lean Democrat, are mega wealthy.
IMO, the wealthy democrats are manipulating the poor democrats for personal gain.
As for the other stereotypes. They are apparently rooted in ignorance. I am an independent conservative. I don't fit their stereotype.
IMO, the wealthy conservatives and Republicans want everyone to have a shot at being wealthy in a free market.
You're right, those stereotypes do NOT describe the constituency. However, I wouldn't completely dismiss those stereotypes to describe party platforms, agendas and the interests represented. Could we possibly 'remove the blinders' enough to see that if we don't fit the stereotype, then quite possibly (probably) the party agenda does not fit our own best interests? Hey, it would be a big step towards a critical look at the two party system and whose interests are truly being served.
Hint: Under the guise of representing US interests, they do not serve US the people.
FYI: The top 3 richest Senators are DEMOCRATS:
The top three wealthiest senators are Democrats: John Kerry of Massachusetts, with a net worth of at least $164 million; Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, with a net worth of at least $111 million, and John "Jay" Rockefeller of West Virginia, with an estimated net worth of at least $82 million.
Senate millionaires
John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399
Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016
John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018
Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025
Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109
Frank Lautenberg, D-New Jersey $17,789,018
John Edwards, D-North Carolina: $12,844,029
Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts: $9,905,009
Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico: $7,981,015
Bob Graham, D-Florida: $7,691,052
Ben Nelson, D-Nebraska: $6,267,028
Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota: $3,974,037
Harry Reid, D-Nevada: $1,500,040
Thomas Carper, D-Delaware: $1,482,017
Maria Cantwell, D-Washington: $1,264,999
Barbara Boxer, D-California: $1,172,003
Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana: $1,080,014
Bill Nelson, D-Florida: $1,073,014
*These figures are base estimates provided by senators on their financial disclosure forms.
I think that liberals believe whatever the media spoon feeds them. I am an educated female in the lower, lower middle class level ( no I do not work in a factory, hold a professional level job) and I am a conservative Republican because I am not rich enough to be a Democrat, or poor enough to benefit from the countless social welfare programs that they fund by taking more and more money out of my paycheck
I don't believe that and it's that knowledge that confounds me so much. They defend protections for the rich that they will ultimately have to pay for themselves. That's as baffling as a soldier who makes sure the enemy's weapons all have full magazines before a battle.
that is so NOT true
most Liberals believe that the majority of conservatives are Poor White Trailer Trash
---------------------
"stereotypes" ??
like Asian people don't drive well
or
black men are well endowed
or
white people can't dance
LOL - where do those crazy stereotypes come from ?
We don't think you're only rich, old, southern men....we know you're also poor, uneducated, gun-toting, bible-thumping, xenophobic, homophobic, red neck, morons....also.
Liberals don't think that all of you are rich old white men from the South we just KNOW that those are the people that run the party and come up with the tricks and lies to get you bunch of haters, bigots and morons to follow them.
True, just because members of a party in Congress are a certain way, doesn't mean the people they are supposed to represent are that way. But it's evident by the answers you are getting from both sides, that people are too stupid to realize that.
It is only logical that old, rich, white (southern?) men would vote conservative. The Conservative and Republican parties represent these people. The Liberal and Democratic parties represent everyone else (upper-middle to lower class).
I think they are crazy stereotypes. However, I think a lot of conservatives do view liberals as all west coast, tree-hugging, veggie-eating types.
Quit bothering me with your good reasoning. The next thing you know, you'll claim that all Muslims aren't terrorists. Everyone knows that stereotypes are always true.
I was raised in Chicago and I've always been conservative. My In-Law relatives are from the hills of Kentucky have always been democrats, most of them dropped out of school in 8th grade! My conservative family is all educated!.
I have never met a Liberal that thinks that. Most Liberals are astounded by the number of poor Republicans as well as the number of Republicans that are on welfare.
I agree, I'm a 16 year old boy, in a band, music is life, does drugs, drinks, loves girls with a passion, is athletic, and dirt poor.
And I'm a hardcore Republican!
Good day, Sir.
let them think that
by that logic all liberals are hollywood elitists that love to fellate each other
Conservatives are selfish folks that think only about themselves...Liberals are their brothers keepers
I agree with Brian. They don't actually think about anything. They only think and do what they're told.
I'm conservative, 24 years old, not rich yet, and a man, who lives in Indiana. So suck on that Delphi.
i don't. I have seen that most "blue" states have higher incomes than red states.
Because that is what they are told to believe..
Did you watch their convention? It was like playing "Where's Waldo" for a young minority.
You forgot 'white'. They think this because they're close-minded.
thats what they do
I like the way you think!
Well they are not but instead Liberals watch NBC, MSNBC and watch Universal Movies, and Conservatives watch FOX, Fox News, and 20th Century Fox Movies why because they control their Tundra that's right both Parties are ruled by the Media.
Take a closer look at the members of that party.
Where'd you get that one?
Is Yahoo Answers really fun anymore?
With all these kids trashing up the politics section and stating flat out-and-out lies regarding good people, like our president, and making heros out of typical republican liars, like tricky dick nixon, and with Yahoo condoing such idiocy, how can this forum be fun anymkore?
What happened to fair honest questions and answers?
They surely can't be found anywhere on Yahoo! anymore, huh?
AMEN Brother!!
I'm as old as dirt, and don't tell flat out lies about Obama. I'm also not a Republican, and if they deserve trashing, I do that too. Tons of research prove that Obama is an admitted globalist and that his policies will destroy the US as we know it. That's his agenda, and to me, anyone who sells his soul to a global governing body which will destroy the sovereignty of our nation, deserves to be trashed.
BTW, I'm not on YA for fun. We are at a serious cross road in our lives and people better wake up before it's too late.
so go to a different site, or even a different section of Y!A, most of the other sections are "fair and honest" questions and answering but there are always going to be trolls at some point, the politics and religion sections are obviously going to be breeding grounds for them and for heated arguments and stupidity among people. If you're looking for a decent political forum to discuss issues, try politicalcrossfire.com or politicalforum.com
It never was fun. So you may as well try to drill something into their heads. Mommy and daddy seem to be failing terribly at the task.
Jokers like those morons on RED EYE speak for the people. America is sunk by the looks of the lack of intelligence speaking for it and if people have to judge America based on Yahoo Answers....pity you all.
People think this is not harmful but IT IS.
I will tell you a story....about Facebook...and how parents say it's a forum for BULLYING.
Well I think it's funny cause I know of two parents who use their kids as pawns and they type sh*t on the computer and try to accuse the children of doing it.
Kind of like that woman who bullied that girl until she killed herself.
There is a lot of damage that can happen on the world of the internet.
In time you will see changes and it will get scary, very scary, as the lawmakers and technology catch up.
These forums are probably 70 percent CHILDREN......who have no idea the dangers that lurk.
As responsible adults someone needs to educate these kids.
That is where I applaud Obama. America is dying of starvation when it comes to needing education.
So by fair and honest, you mean only from your side. In that case, the answer is NO. It's not fun. Mainly because all people do is stir the pot in the Politics section. Both sides do it. Not just the Conservatives. I sincerly try to answer questions with what I feel is a fact-based answer and then one of two things happen. The first is all the trolls from the other side thumbs down my answers. OR - the answer that says something idiotic like "Because Bush is an idiot" gets picked as best answer anyway, regardless of reason, logic, common sense or better yet, KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
I'd love to have a forum where people could debate like adults, about real issues, instead of slagging through all of this constant mudslinging.
But what can you do? It's an open forum, and it attracts the partisan hacks and the loonies. And, yes, the kids and the clueless.
The only answer is a moderated forum, and that's not gonna happen here.
I have to admit YA! has been overrun with racists, homophobes and just your basic trolls since last year but lately it has gotten absolutely ridiculous. I haven't seen it this bad since it was overrun by 'shiraz' trolls.
I struggle to give even partially serious answer to most of the drivel posted on here.
This is more of a social networking site like Facebook than it is a place for people looking for serious dialog. If this is not your idea of fun, I understand where you're coming from, but personally, I'm enjoying it. Of course, I've only been here for about a week.
Well, you can always surf the DNC website, that way you will NEVER be exposed to anything you disagree with.
Avoiding the viewpoints of others is apparently the hallmark of the truly progressive and evolved liberal - congratulations.
You're right, all to often I come to this site looking for an interesting distraction, but only finding pointless circular slanging matches over politics and religion, and schoolkids wanting dating advice or homework help.
In fact, right now, I think I'm going to st...
No.
I used to enjoy reading other opinions and have some kind of debate, but its become a ghetto.
It is now just a way for the ignorant and insane to vent talking points they heard on Hannity.
Its gotten much worse since the election... I'm taking a break soon.
Like you said~ ALL THESE KIDS.
That's what happened. They need a separate forum in my opinion.
YA was so amazing in the beginning it was all over the news.
Now it's overrun with Am I Pretty? or Does She Like Me?
Sad.
You seem to be just as biased yourself. There have been "problematic" politicians on both sides of the isle. Did not Mr Clinton say that he "did not have sex with that women." But we know otherwise. Was that not a lie?
Yahoo Answers help me a lot on my homework and projects. I get a lot of ideas here. I don't mind those who are hungry of attention and ask those f*cked up questions and give asswipe answers.
Yeah, you're right. What is more fun than a big leftist circle jerk? This way you'd have no one to challenge you, nothing thought-provoking. Sounds great. And reeeeeally "fair and honest".
Is it fun?
Sometimes.
Can you find me two questions were someone here said something positive about Richard Nixon?
Your question had potential, until you turned into those that you bashed!!
It is fun because people like you make a joke out of it.
..or should I say people like you are a joke.
Anyway, either would be a laugh-line for PrezBO on Leno, right?
I am having more fun than ever.....it is hilarious reading these Obama supporters bash Palin and Rush and every other person who does not matter instead of defending their messiahs failed policies
What are you talking about? Obama is supposed to be president, instead he's just the teleprompter-reader-in-chief!
About the only fun part of Yahoo Answers is reading these kind of questions, the rest has always been exactly what you said.
I like the first part of your question, and than it turned to the drivel I guess you must be as imature as the kids your knocking
Heck yes this is one of thenost entertaining things that i can do in my spare time and there are also some very funny questions out there
Liberals ruined the honest part; as for fair, the world isn't fair, get used to it.
was it ever about fun,? or how ABOUT GETTING REAL ANSWERS, and of course opinions!!!! ^__^
No. Agreed.
I liked it better when Republicans didn't fight back.
If you are looking for serious answers, go elsewhere
You're lying about Republicans. That makes YOU an idiotic kid.
It's fun 2 me, and I kinda agree with what ur saying. Lots of people just want 2 hear ur opinions on things that they have in mind.
whatev's its just talk. and venting and stuff. no biggie to really analyze.
i guess this is ironic as you are doing exactly what you're condemning,
???
Yes, but sometimes people can be so mean.
What happened to fair honest questions and answers?
They surely can't be found anywhere on Yahoo! anymore, huh?
AMEN Brother!!
I'm as old as dirt, and don't tell flat out lies about Obama. I'm also not a Republican, and if they deserve trashing, I do that too. Tons of research prove that Obama is an admitted globalist and that his policies will destroy the US as we know it. That's his agenda, and to me, anyone who sells his soul to a global governing body which will destroy the sovereignty of our nation, deserves to be trashed.
BTW, I'm not on YA for fun. We are at a serious cross road in our lives and people better wake up before it's too late.
so go to a different site, or even a different section of Y!A, most of the other sections are "fair and honest" questions and answering but there are always going to be trolls at some point, the politics and religion sections are obviously going to be breeding grounds for them and for heated arguments and stupidity among people. If you're looking for a decent political forum to discuss issues, try politicalcrossfire.com or politicalforum.com
It never was fun. So you may as well try to drill something into their heads. Mommy and daddy seem to be failing terribly at the task.
Jokers like those morons on RED EYE speak for the people. America is sunk by the looks of the lack of intelligence speaking for it and if people have to judge America based on Yahoo Answers....pity you all.
People think this is not harmful but IT IS.
I will tell you a story....about Facebook...and how parents say it's a forum for BULLYING.
Well I think it's funny cause I know of two parents who use their kids as pawns and they type sh*t on the computer and try to accuse the children of doing it.
Kind of like that woman who bullied that girl until she killed herself.
There is a lot of damage that can happen on the world of the internet.
In time you will see changes and it will get scary, very scary, as the lawmakers and technology catch up.
These forums are probably 70 percent CHILDREN......who have no idea the dangers that lurk.
As responsible adults someone needs to educate these kids.
That is where I applaud Obama. America is dying of starvation when it comes to needing education.
So by fair and honest, you mean only from your side. In that case, the answer is NO. It's not fun. Mainly because all people do is stir the pot in the Politics section. Both sides do it. Not just the Conservatives. I sincerly try to answer questions with what I feel is a fact-based answer and then one of two things happen. The first is all the trolls from the other side thumbs down my answers. OR - the answer that says something idiotic like "Because Bush is an idiot" gets picked as best answer anyway, regardless of reason, logic, common sense or better yet, KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE SUBJECT.
I'd love to have a forum where people could debate like adults, about real issues, instead of slagging through all of this constant mudslinging.
But what can you do? It's an open forum, and it attracts the partisan hacks and the loonies. And, yes, the kids and the clueless.
The only answer is a moderated forum, and that's not gonna happen here.
I have to admit YA! has been overrun with racists, homophobes and just your basic trolls since last year but lately it has gotten absolutely ridiculous. I haven't seen it this bad since it was overrun by 'shiraz' trolls.
I struggle to give even partially serious answer to most of the drivel posted on here.
This is more of a social networking site like Facebook than it is a place for people looking for serious dialog. If this is not your idea of fun, I understand where you're coming from, but personally, I'm enjoying it. Of course, I've only been here for about a week.
Well, you can always surf the DNC website, that way you will NEVER be exposed to anything you disagree with.
Avoiding the viewpoints of others is apparently the hallmark of the truly progressive and evolved liberal - congratulations.
You're right, all to often I come to this site looking for an interesting distraction, but only finding pointless circular slanging matches over politics and religion, and schoolkids wanting dating advice or homework help.
In fact, right now, I think I'm going to st...
No.
I used to enjoy reading other opinions and have some kind of debate, but its become a ghetto.
It is now just a way for the ignorant and insane to vent talking points they heard on Hannity.
Its gotten much worse since the election... I'm taking a break soon.
Like you said~ ALL THESE KIDS.
That's what happened. They need a separate forum in my opinion.
YA was so amazing in the beginning it was all over the news.
Now it's overrun with Am I Pretty? or Does She Like Me?
Sad.
You seem to be just as biased yourself. There have been "problematic" politicians on both sides of the isle. Did not Mr Clinton say that he "did not have sex with that women." But we know otherwise. Was that not a lie?
Yahoo Answers help me a lot on my homework and projects. I get a lot of ideas here. I don't mind those who are hungry of attention and ask those f*cked up questions and give asswipe answers.
Yeah, you're right. What is more fun than a big leftist circle jerk? This way you'd have no one to challenge you, nothing thought-provoking. Sounds great. And reeeeeally "fair and honest".
Is it fun?
Sometimes.
Can you find me two questions were someone here said something positive about Richard Nixon?
Your question had potential, until you turned into those that you bashed!!
It is fun because people like you make a joke out of it.
..or should I say people like you are a joke.
Anyway, either would be a laugh-line for PrezBO on Leno, right?
I am having more fun than ever.....it is hilarious reading these Obama supporters bash Palin and Rush and every other person who does not matter instead of defending their messiahs failed policies
What are you talking about? Obama is supposed to be president, instead he's just the teleprompter-reader-in-chief!
About the only fun part of Yahoo Answers is reading these kind of questions, the rest has always been exactly what you said.
I like the first part of your question, and than it turned to the drivel I guess you must be as imature as the kids your knocking
Heck yes this is one of thenost entertaining things that i can do in my spare time and there are also some very funny questions out there
Liberals ruined the honest part; as for fair, the world isn't fair, get used to it.
was it ever about fun,? or how ABOUT GETTING REAL ANSWERS, and of course opinions!!!! ^__^
No. Agreed.
I liked it better when Republicans didn't fight back.
If you are looking for serious answers, go elsewhere
You're lying about Republicans. That makes YOU an idiotic kid.
It's fun 2 me, and I kinda agree with what ur saying. Lots of people just want 2 hear ur opinions on things that they have in mind.
whatev's its just talk. and venting and stuff. no biggie to really analyze.
i guess this is ironic as you are doing exactly what you're condemning,
???
Yes, but sometimes people can be so mean.
Can you get a DUI in the US on your own private property?
Say you have a ranch, and are driving your own vehicle, over the DUI limit, but never venture out onto a public road. Can you get a DUI for that?
It depends where you are.
In Ohio, you can be sitting in a parked car...in your garage and get a DUI
I don't know of that ever happening, but you COULD be charged on private property
I think the answer would be yes. I think the way the law is written, it doesn't distinguish between public or private property. Look up DWI on the web, you'll probably find something there. But my question would be, what are the cops doing on your private property ? In my opinion, they shouldn't even be there, if you didn't call them. I think that should be a good argument in court. If the the cops were on your property illegally, I think the judge would have to dismiss the charges.
DUI is defined by state law, not nationwide law. In my state you can be convicted of DUI for driving on a public highway or "any property to which the public has access." That includes parking lots, parks, land owned by the BLM, etc, but probably not a private, fenced ranch.
Our friends had a son who was drunk in McDonalds Parking lot..was in a mall so the lot was large. The police said they could not enter private property to issue a Drunk Driving citation but had to wait until he pulled out on the city street.
Against the law to be in control and operate a motor vehicle under the influence, regardless of where.
Not DUI, but there are laws against Public Intoxication, even on your own property.
No but they can get you for disorderly conduct.
No
It depends where you are.
In Ohio, you can be sitting in a parked car...in your garage and get a DUI
I don't know of that ever happening, but you COULD be charged on private property
I think the answer would be yes. I think the way the law is written, it doesn't distinguish between public or private property. Look up DWI on the web, you'll probably find something there. But my question would be, what are the cops doing on your private property ? In my opinion, they shouldn't even be there, if you didn't call them. I think that should be a good argument in court. If the the cops were on your property illegally, I think the judge would have to dismiss the charges.
DUI is defined by state law, not nationwide law. In my state you can be convicted of DUI for driving on a public highway or "any property to which the public has access." That includes parking lots, parks, land owned by the BLM, etc, but probably not a private, fenced ranch.
Our friends had a son who was drunk in McDonalds Parking lot..was in a mall so the lot was large. The police said they could not enter private property to issue a Drunk Driving citation but had to wait until he pulled out on the city street.
Against the law to be in control and operate a motor vehicle under the influence, regardless of where.
Not DUI, but there are laws against Public Intoxication, even on your own property.
No but they can get you for disorderly conduct.
No
Army Recruiters please help?
I went to MEPS last week and I passed the physicals and everything, but turns out they were out of slots for the job that I wanted(Infantry) in the time frame that I wanted.
At this point, I don't care how long I enlist for, just as long as I get 31B Military Police. Do you think I can find an open slot for MP training before June? I don't care about the bonuses or contract length or anything. I just want to be an MP and I need to ship out before June because my apartment lease runs out June 3rd.
Thanks!
there is no way to tell when you will be able to ship out. even though your in a tough postion i wouldnt rush it. this job that you pick will be what you are doing for the next 4 years or so. just make sure it is exactly what you want to do. if they dont have what you want dont sign anything. a slot for your job will come open sooner than you think
One of the skills I learned in the Army was how to solve incredibly simple problems. I think yours can be categorized as that. Talk to your recruiter! What do we know? I'm thinking that a phone call to your recruiter will do more to solve your current crisis then a thousand postings on Yahoo Answers!
A thought to ponder; no one really cares for slackers: pogues or REMF's in the military and MP's qualify on all counts.
try going reserves, maybe a slot is open there, you can then turn around in six months and go active duty, talk to a recruiter and make sure I know what I am talkign about.
You can only get MP if your ASVAD scores alloy you to get it, did they tell you that?
Recruiters have buckets to fill. if one recruiter tells you that you can't do something, go talk to another recruiter. he may be filling you full of BS so he can meet a different months worth of requirements.
At this point, I don't care how long I enlist for, just as long as I get 31B Military Police. Do you think I can find an open slot for MP training before June? I don't care about the bonuses or contract length or anything. I just want to be an MP and I need to ship out before June because my apartment lease runs out June 3rd.
Thanks!
there is no way to tell when you will be able to ship out. even though your in a tough postion i wouldnt rush it. this job that you pick will be what you are doing for the next 4 years or so. just make sure it is exactly what you want to do. if they dont have what you want dont sign anything. a slot for your job will come open sooner than you think
One of the skills I learned in the Army was how to solve incredibly simple problems. I think yours can be categorized as that. Talk to your recruiter! What do we know? I'm thinking that a phone call to your recruiter will do more to solve your current crisis then a thousand postings on Yahoo Answers!
A thought to ponder; no one really cares for slackers: pogues or REMF's in the military and MP's qualify on all counts.
try going reserves, maybe a slot is open there, you can then turn around in six months and go active duty, talk to a recruiter and make sure I know what I am talkign about.
You can only get MP if your ASVAD scores alloy you to get it, did they tell you that?
Recruiters have buckets to fill. if one recruiter tells you that you can't do something, go talk to another recruiter. he may be filling you full of BS so he can meet a different months worth of requirements.
What
I was wondering what makes napalm sticky and jelly like.
Why did they ban it?
Aren't most weapons inhumane?
Palmitic acid made from palm oil the same stuff they used to put in soap (few soaps still do) or a styrene ester; the military uses M4 thickner issued in 1 lb or up to 30 lb drums.
Napalm is not banned just rarely used with today's pinpoint weapons systems. Napalm, and devices using it, are good for the defense against a traditional attacking force; a scenario we haven't encountered in a while.
A realistic scenario would be against a large scale attack by the North Koreans against defending forces along the DMZ in Korea.
They use coconut oil I believe. They banned it because it was used to burn people and things which is considered barbaric. I don't think any weapon is humane but I do think they are very much needed in our world today...for the same reasons they were since the beginning of recorded history. Funny how the UN can decide burning someone to death is bad but shooting and blowing them up is alright.
I don't know the exact chemical composition, but it's the same stuff which is in soap that makes the gasoline turn to jelly when heated. And who banned it?
It has Palmitic acid that emulsifies gasoline.
Why did they ban it?
Aren't most weapons inhumane?
Palmitic acid made from palm oil the same stuff they used to put in soap (few soaps still do) or a styrene ester; the military uses M4 thickner issued in 1 lb or up to 30 lb drums.
Napalm is not banned just rarely used with today's pinpoint weapons systems. Napalm, and devices using it, are good for the defense against a traditional attacking force; a scenario we haven't encountered in a while.
A realistic scenario would be against a large scale attack by the North Koreans against defending forces along the DMZ in Korea.
They use coconut oil I believe. They banned it because it was used to burn people and things which is considered barbaric. I don't think any weapon is humane but I do think they are very much needed in our world today...for the same reasons they were since the beginning of recorded history. Funny how the UN can decide burning someone to death is bad but shooting and blowing them up is alright.
I don't know the exact chemical composition, but it's the same stuff which is in soap that makes the gasoline turn to jelly when heated. And who banned it?
It has Palmitic acid that emulsifies gasoline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)