Aside from the obvious like when someone hurts or kills or causes damage to someone or their property... Here in the UK it's illegal to say something racist... and i think th... moreAside from the obvious like when someone hurts or kills or causes damage to someone or their property... Here in the UK it's illegal to say something racist... and i think that's right.. we don't have the right in enjoying our *rights* to harm or infringe upon other's rights... I am told by the good people, (that being a generalised term of address meaning all the people on here) on this list that it's not illegal there to express racist views.. I am interested in that.. out of curiosity while browsing the help section here I read a piece about free speech on here.. it said..."In other words, the Constitution promises Americans that Congress won't prevent you from speaking freely, but there are still caveats to this. For example, you can't yell "fire" in a public place when there is no danger. You also can't use "fighting words" or threats. This has been upheld by the courts repeatedly. You can be charged with a crime if you call someone a name and you can face legal consequences for it. "So.. m... less
Why would anyone pay diddily if he/she is innocent of all charges/liability? Of course they're guilty as he ** and liable and not admitting it changes nothing. But it is annoying. ... moreWhy would anyone pay diddily if he/she is innocent of all charges/liability? Of course they're guilty as he ** and liable and not admitting it changes nothing. But it is annoying. What is the legality here? If you admit guilt what happens? If you refuse to admit guilt what happens? Why the lie? Whom does it benefit? It fools no one. Just another phony device used to pretend/fake/lie.
I assume the purchaser will have to pay a fee for the background check which will add to the cost of the ammunition?Does California know how to lose tax revenue better than any other state?
An Answermugger friend said he was dismissed from jury duty because he had actually experienced something similar to what the case was about. Is that fair? I know it is the job of ... moreAn Answermugger friend said he was dismissed from jury duty because he had actually experienced something similar to what the case was about. Is that fair? I know it is the job of a defense attorney to get his/her client off, guilty or not. But not allowing people to sit on juries who may have experienced something similar seems to me like stacking the deck. What do you think and why?
Here is the proof. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-parliament-passes-religious-vilification-laws-20160804-gqlagu.html FACT: Laws against vilifying individuals or group... moreHere is the proof. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-parliament-passes-religious-vilification-laws-20160804-gqlagu.html FACT: Laws against vilifying individuals or groups go against freedom of speech as vilification is not the same thing as a threat or incitement of violence.
