Saturday, October 31, 2009

What do you think is a better idea for a mini documentary?

The topic is multicultral britain and whether it is fact or fantasy?
Do you think:
There is no fantasy, but complete fact. Then go on to explain the history of immagration into Britain from the 800 AD to present time. This would show the point that multicultural Britain is something that doesn't need to be done because it already is?
My second one is the fashion surrounding multicultural society -like being Green. This would show how leaders are exploiting this idea to get votes, when really there is no need to create this trendy utopia.

If you can think of better ideas please share, or if you can think of a way to intergrate both of these ideas.
Answers:
I think the fashion one would go over better, but I agree with the immigration thing, too.
I think the fact or fantasy would be very interesting but this has been covered in many ways, however I love the second idea its a different slant on multiculterism, it has already captured my interest and something I would like to see. It sounds like it could be a subject that needs a lot of research though and hard work!!

What do you think if a prosecutor, a Ho and a student got together a plan to sue N.C. for 18M and split 3..?

ways after the thing was history. thats 6M each and retirement.
Answers:
LOL!!

I don't think even a NC jury would be dumb enough to fall for it..
more power to them.

What do you think if a prosecutor, a Ho and a student got together a plan to sue N.C. for 18M and split 3..?

they split the 18M later after the media coverage stops, all retire with 5M and defence attorneys are paid 3M.
Answers:
I think you are saying a great movie plot.
If the prosecutor is Nijon they are in trouble because they will get caught.

If Bill Clinton is the prosecutor, they would get away with it. He's too smooth.
Would that be Ho Chi Minh or Don Ho??
A prosecutor, a ho and a student walk into a bar...
I see where you're coming from. Interesting. I say go for it. Only on the condition the ho straightens her hair out. I hate nappy headed Ho's.

What do you think about Zachary Jones?

He sent a text to a girl, and he was beat to death because of it. What a sad state our world is in.

Don't you think this should be considered a "hate crime"? After all he was only following through on his sexual orientation, right?
Answers:
Nice slip up.. I missed it too..

I still agree!

His poor family, we need to keep them in our thoughts and prayers...

I hope those three rot. Totally a Hate Crime!
Who is Zachary Jones ?

What do you think about this?

Read this story,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19171577/...

I think it's an injustice that this BOY was ever in prison. What he did should not have even been considered a crime.
Answers:
Disgusting. It's nice to see some judges out there who have some sense of decency about them. This should have never even been a case... period. Sad.
Must have been somebody who was important daughter who was giving him the BJ. And they didn't like it. Probably a white official.
Statutory rape laws typically have lesser (or no) penalties for situations where one party is only two years older than the other.

I agree that the original sentence was excessive.
10 years for something consensual when he was underage as well - that's crazy. It's rather f'ed up that when underage teens have sex, it's automatically the guy who's to blame.

What do you think about this?

I'm a British citizen and need a green card to live in the U.S. About three months ago, I applied for a new one. I went down there with my mom and we got out fingerprints taken. I have no fingers on my right hand and therefore had to be put down as an amputee. Ten days later my mom gets her green card in the mail. The next post, I get a letter saying I had to go back down there.
I go down there and completely baffle them as to why i am there. I am cleared, so there is no problem with my application. THey finally figure out that I just need to get my picture retaken, but when the guy tried to take my picture, he got all confused about how to put in my right index finger print as I don't have one. I finally did get my green card, but it was a lot of trouble.
THis guy who worked there also said that "amputees" often get called back because they have to make sure that everything is right. THe truth is, the green card wouldn't print without my right index fingerprint.
Answers:
It sounds like typical bureaucratic hoops you have to jump through. Since 911 they are even more strict. Sorry for the inconvenience but welcome to America.
Sounds like they have a training issue here. It's probably in a manual somewhere what they need to do,but who opens up manuals?
That why oaths in this country, for various legal matters, had to be changed.
Of sound mind and body was considered discrimination, and they removed the part about body.
Government beauracracy at its finest.

What do you think about this 'name and shame' idea, by the c.s.a to shame absent parents into paying up?


Answers:
Firstly, child support and access are 2 different issues.
If an absent parent is not deemed as fit to have access either supervised or unsupervised to their children, then that does NOT preclude them for having to pay to support them.

As for naming and shaming, most absent parents couldn't and wouldn't give a monkey's cuss about being named, they already have no morals, as they should be paying freely towards the upkeep of their offspring, as they have a moral and legal responsibility to do so.

The CSA have had powers to remove driving licences, and passports, and even to imprison absent parents, powers they have rarely used and when they have been into the courts, some half assed judge has allowed the absent parent the upper hand ...demoralising for both CSA and more importantly for the PWC.

Probably the most effective way to secure the money for PWC's and the children would be to sell arrears debts to private agencies(which they have had the power to do for about 6 months now except in clerical cases) - the agency pays the PWC the arrears, and then send in the heavy boys to get the money from the absent parent. NRP's are less likely to stick up 2 fingers at a 20 stones bruiser, than at a letter from the CSA threatening them with a tickle from a feather!!
its daft .it will embarrass the kids
to be honest until the courts show some kind of equality between the parents and can enforce the father's visiting rights then they should not have to pay
The csa are clutching at straws becuase they know time is running out for them, name%26shame is just a delay tactic it aint gonna work.
I don't think it will help either party and it could cause problems for the children when friends learn about their family life.
It seems a bit stupid and pointless to me. If an absent parent is the type of person that's going to abandon their children they are unlikely to be affected by having their name put on a web site. If they aren't paying because they can't, then they still won't be able to regardless of where their name is posted.
If they had any shame in the first place, they'd support their children - that goes for absent mothers and fathers,

Custody, contact and residency has nothing to do with the basic, day to day needs of the children, wherever they live and whether they see one or both parents doesn't alter the fact they need, housing feeding and clothing.
I watched a programme on TV last night about this.
One man - who was divorced - had his two kids living with him in the same house and yet he still had to pay the c.s.a.
Crazy or what!?
im surprised it is not breaching there human rights. also i remember the horror stories about the csa when it first started; they would take the lions share of peoples wages thus shoving them in to poverty and wrecking lives. the csa should be scrapped.

What Do You Think About This For Justice..?

Instead of the criminals getting paid for being in jail they should have to make sacrifices and do their duties for free!! So we in Society ( non-criminals and tax payers) can have all of our Health Care for free!! paid by the government. Wouldn't that be a nice change?
Answers:
If that includes them serving time and the time that they serve they have to WORK in jail to pay for the food, anemities like sheets nd blankets, and recreation that they get to do,,then i am all for it...That gives us( taxpayers and non criminals) free health care..where do i sign.lol
No thanks. I would rather have that murderer behind bars.
Where do you think the government gets their money? The damn tax payers.thus health care would not be free.
The problems with the criminal justice system aside,There is not ONE example in all of history where socialized medicine has worked.People DIE waiting for surgery.New York hospitals are FULL of Canadians coming here to get health care,escaping the government-paid Canadian system.
This is America, nothing is free. The far left would call it cruel and unusual punishment. Besides, our court system has nothing to do with justice. Peace :)

What do you think about this Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill?

I am still trying to figure out exactly what our government is trying to reform. Check out the following article about yesterday's Senate Vote.
The Senate has rejected an amendment to the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" bill that would have denied legal status to illegal alien felons who ignored deportation orders or returned to the U.S. after being deported.
Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) says proponents of the supposed "grand compromise" on immigration failed to take an opportunity to restore public confidence that the Senate is "serious about passing an immigration law that could actually work." The Senate narrowly defeated an amendment sponsored by Cornyn that would have barred terrorists, violent gang members, sex offenders, alien smugglers who use firearms, and repeat drunk drivers from being awarded any immigration benefits.
So I ask again what is our government trying to reform? It sounds like they are trying to make foreign criminals into U.S. citizens.
Answers:
I am a little puzzled as to why if 80+% of Americans are against legalizing any of the illegal immigrants that they not only want to let them all stay and become citizens..but we also want their criminals too? WTF?

Even a US felon looses the bulk of their rights -- but we want to give illegal felons more rights?

Is there a noxious gas leaking onto the Senate floor that is making these people stupid or is this just what God graced them with upon their birth?
Thank you, Democrat-controlled Senate.

What do you think about the swedish prostitution law?

Sweden considers prostitution a form of violence against women so the government criminalizes the people who buy sex, not the prostitutes.

Ironically, they do not criminalize pornography. Sweden is both a big producer and a big consumer of pornography.
Answers:
I thought they were all ways Neutral..
It makes sense. But then, Sweden is a much more civilized country than ours.
it was a nice idea but according to several studies it just drove prostitution underground into more dangerous situations. The link below has a section on it in the Abolition part of the site.

What do you think about the smoking ban starting in on 1st July at 6 am?

i think it is a disgraceful that they banned smoking in public by
August drinking bubbly in public will be banned lol
Answers:
I think it's great!

I smoked from when I was 13 till 33 (when i got pregnant,) now I am very happy to say I haven't smoked for 4 years. I really don't want my son to smoke and with this ban making it more difficult for smokers I hope he won't start.
I do feel sorry for the smokers as it must feel like they are being victimised, but passive smoking causes cancer and it is time the non-smokers where protected.
It would be wonderful if this helped give smokers the push they need to quit. All of my friends and family who smoke are trying to quit, I actually only have 3 close family and friends who smoke.

Any way end of rant, I'll get of my soap box and they better not ban bubbly lol
I'm all for ANYTHING that bans smoking ANYWHERE
they should make a room for people to smoke in
well i dont smoke so im glad -- sorry that you feel that way xx
Its great news, its just pathetic that its taken this long!!
i think the ones passing legilation like this need a lit cigar shoved up their a**
i think its a gd think as a lot of people do not smoke and smoking causes alot of problems
In a way im all for it as wont be going home all stinking of smoke, but on the other hand all my mates smoke so ill be stuck inside while the party's going on out there!!
IT IS A GREAT IDEA because now smokers can't give 2 year olds passive lung cancer.
Unemployment will rise in the long run when this law takes effect.
in scotland its already been banned.
in ways its really good as im not a smoker but my mum and some other my friends are. but when i go for meals and stuff it feels better as smoke isnt all around and that.
but just today i found out when my mum has vistors at the house like imporantant people or people from school ect.. she isit aloud to smoke coz its public or somthing now i think that rediculas we should be aloowed to do what we want in our own house!
so im half and half!
its all gonna go up in SMOKE i can see it coming off
I think it's great. Why should I have to breathe your filthy dangerous fumes?
Where is this at? I know here a new law just went into effect, no smoking in bars and restaurants and also on city property, which includes parks. It is a good thing I have just recently quit smoking and I can even smell people in stores who have been smoking before they came into the store, it is nasty and to think I used to smell like that.
Straight up Non Smoking I'm pro, the rest someone dictating what to do I'm con, but , at the end of the day non smokers shouldn't have to put up with us, I'm a smoker, and i believe it will do us some good and all.
As for Bubbly, i don't think you have to worry for a while , the whole country is on a no smoke zone, lmao.
I do not smoke, do not like the smell and due to asthma have breathing troubles if I am in a smokey atmosphere. But I think it is totally wrong for such a law to exist, there are far too many of these silly laws saying what we can and cannot do.
if people want to kill themselves by getting lung cancer, infections and heart disease from their fags. let them do it in their own homes and not around people who want to live... ecspecially kids
it is good and it is bad
Govt cannot make such decisions which simply satisfies a small group of people.Probably they must bring a consensus and then put forward there ban .
Yeah! About time, too!
I think it's disgusting to be exposed to second hand smoke!

Smokers always like to brag that they are "considerate" of non-smokers yet every time I'm at a parade, a fair, concert, etc. they are smoking right in the middle of everyone!

Since they disrespect others--they deserve this ban!!

Don't even get me started about all of the cigarette butts that smokers toss on sidewalks, streets, grass, etc.
yeah, it doesn't make much sense to me... why we want to pick certain things and label them as bad and attempt to ban. i.e. smoking in public, marijuana, etc.. do people not realize there are other things just as bad? do people not realize addiction and unhealthy lifestyles are not limited to smoking and drinking? more people die each year due to obesity, by far, than they do from smoking/drinking. or how about the internet/tv? ..anything can be addictive if you let it. i dunno, i'm just sick of people sitting on their high horse trying to direct everyone's lives.
I think it is a good thing. The only bad thing is that it took so long for it to come around.
I agree with this.
Just thinking that while I wait for the train in the morning there won't be anybody next to me rushing to finish the last cigar before the next train arrives ...
Absolutely brilliant. It's been banned here in Ireland for a couple of years and it's the best thing ever - even smokers agree!
If they didn't sell the cigarettes if the first place we wouldn't be having this talk. I think drinking is bigger problem than smoking. I just don't understand all this in the 80's every body smoked and you could smoke in all the restraints. Now a days people are just so stuck up that is isn't funny.
Heart disease is still the number one killer in this country. The number one cause of heart disese is being over wheight so we should made it ill legal to serve fat people at public places to eat. Cars put out deadly gases so us outlaw driving. Drunk drivers kill innocent people so thats the end of alcohol. And the list goes on and on by the way I don't smoke.
i think its great!
we were in Dublin last year and everyone was fine about it !and it was wonderful to go home without smelling like an ashtray!!
oh and by the way there are ares in London Chester and Liverpol that ban drinking in public places! keeps the winos away!!
Before I start I'll tell you all now, I'm a non smoker. However, I'm appalled at the hysterical screaming and ranting of the anti-smoking mob. There should be rooms set aside for smokers. After all, they pay far more in taxes than non-smokers and cost the N.H.S. no more than most people. Lung cancer usually kills fairly quickly. I'm becoming more than a little worried about these pressure groups. Although they are mostly in the minority they are given far more attention than is justified. Someone in the vegetarian section of Q%26A wants a tax put on meat and meat products. The cheek!
personally i cried and it gets worse in September the smoking age will go up to 18 , i only just got legal !!!
is drinking in public places apart from licenced premises not already banned

What do you think about the new portugal abortion law?

Friday, June 22, 2007


New Portugal abortion law to take effect July 15
Michael Sung



[JURIST] The Portuguese government officially published a new abortion law [JURIST report] Thursday, formally adopting the law and paving the way for it to enter effect on July 15. The law allows abortions [JURIST news archive] during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy free of charge at a public hospital, but requires a meeting with a doctor who will be required to warn of the potential dangers followed by a three-day mandatory "reflection" period. Women will also be required to attend family planning education within two weeks following an abortion to be educated on contraception methods.
Answers:
I think it's fantastic. The emphasis on reflection and education is to be commended.

Imagine that--in a highly Catholic country.
Although I do not favor abortion, I cannot rule out abortion for some women. This sounds like a good law.
Pretty sad when a relatively poor, religiously conservative almost 3rd world country is more civilized, advanced, and forward-thinking than we are...
hmm, i think as long as the doctor is not preaching and/or guilt-tripping the woman and is actually offering solid medical advice and information, then it is a progressive measure.
imagine, a woman's right to choose what to do about her own body, and not the government.
Well i think it is great that they are making it harder to abort but i dont think aborting should be tolerated AT ALL! [its an easier way to say murder of a newborn child.]

What do you think about the knew law of inmigrations?


Answers:
Okay I belive that any one who wants to do good is alowwed in this country but, stopping everyone...mmmm not so good
What new laws? There is a bill in congress that will get a whole bunch of politicians sent packing if they pass it. Is that what you are referring to?
I don't know what law your talking about, but my views on immigration are very jaded. I believe that if your going to come to my country, know the English language in order to communicate, but don't expect me to learn yours if I went to your country to live you'd expect the same from me. I want to be able to express my views without this "political correctness" I don't care if your offended, the Constitution affords me certain rights and that's one of them. This is where I was born and my "race "should not have to give jobs to yours just because of the color of your skin, in fact RACE should have nothing to do with it your skills should determine who gets the job. Now I'm not saying I'm better, but neither are they. Most of the immigrants I have come into contact with lie, cheat, and steal because they are"owed" something and that's not how real life works so deal with it.
The problem is really complex. On the one hand we have a large number of illegals (estimated at 20 million) leaching off the system and a very porous borders and on the other hand we have a real need for immigrant labor. With an unemployment rate of around 4% we have roughly six million unemployed and an estimated 12 million working illegal immigrants; so even if every unemployed person took one of those jobs we would still be 6 million short. On the other hand we need to stop the influx of illegals who want to leach off the system and those who want to do us harm. The current bill is huge (over 700 pages) so I am not sure what is in it, but the President's idea is sound. You add to the border patrol and create a fence (both physical and virtual) to try and seal the borders and you create a guest worker program that controls the influx of immigrants into the country (the current 400,000 number is impractical) You also must enforce the penalties against employers for now there will be no real benefit to hire an illegal when you can hire "guest workers" who are legal. This should bring the hidden workers into the open and remove cover for those who want to abuse the system or do us harm. The real problem is the next presidential election. Who can you trust to follow through and see that the enforcement side happens and not just the guest worker program, that the penalties are enforced and it just doesn't become amnesty. While I would have trusted Bush to do this he will be gone and the current front runners create a real problem in my mind. You know the three leading democrats as well as McCain will let it turn into amnesty. I'm not sure where Giuliani will ultimately end up on this and only Romney will put enforcement first. So all in all I believe this bill needs to go down in defeat.

What do you think about the guy who had TB virus, yet flew all over europe?

Do you think he is innocent but negligent simply thinking it was OK for him to travel, and go on his honeymoon, or is the fact that he flew back to Canada from europe before driving back into US, makes his guilt premeditated? Do you think it is fair that he was broadcasted like an international terrorist? Or was he plain irresponsible, not meaning bad?
Answers:
he says he has a tape that proves they didn't tell him he couldn't fly and sounds genuinely sorry. I think the progressive assertion by the CDC and his local doctors sounds suspicious. I really find it curious that his father-in-law works in the TB unit at CDC. Think he tried to prevent the wedding by infecting his future son-in-law? He's under investigation
i dont know
Extremely selfish.
You know TB isn't as uncommon as people think. It is airbourne and many millions of people carry it. Most the time poeple don't know they have it and it doesn't bother them. I don't think he should be broadcast as a terroist.
he's guilty

1. his new father-in-law is a disease specialist at the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta. Apparently, both "Dad" and his own physician told him he shouldn't fly.

2. he is a personal injury lawyer [litigator, not solicitor]. He makes his living arguing in court that people should have know their actions were dangerous to others and that since his client was injured, the person should pay [and big dollars, too].


My quite serious suggestion for anyone who finds out they unknowingly were exposed to this drug resistant form of TB is to sue the guy. Get a real bulldog of an injury attorney [John Edwards needs a job!! :-)] and take him for millions. The anxiety and worry while you wait and wait for test results alone should be compensated with 25 million USD.


dang fool.

:-)
There's a lot of conflicting information on this story. Take a look at this article in June 2 New York Times: http://travel.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/hea... .

(Times website is free. You may have to register if you haven't already.)

What do you think about the 3 strikes law?

Is it good or bad? and why do you hink that way?

Thank you.
Answers:
Well, you have to start with questions like this by not thinking in terms of 'good or bad.' Things like this aren't that simple. What should be asked is what are its effects? What are its effects on the criminals, on society, on economics?

As someone already mentioned, it is bad economically to put someone in jail for the rest of their lives because it costs the taxpayers money to feed these people. As for the criminals themselves, it has good and bad effects. For those who have already got two strikes, they are much less likely to commit the third strike if they know and care about the consequences. On the other hand, it makes people more likely to commit the first and second strikes because they know they can do it!

I think that there should be no general rule like this. Crime is too broad an area. There should be judges who decide whether or not a criminal can be rehabilitated or whether or not the criminal should be put to death. It should be cheaper to put the dangerous ones to death.
we dont have it here in oz so i cant say to much except,they say prision is about rehabilitating people,so i guess what i trying to say is ,in between the strikes did the government try to offer any assistance to the person if not i would say the 3 strike rule is just another government stuff up.
hey would you like to be the victim of a persons fourth strike, yea i thought so, it works, it keeps repeat trouble makes off the streets b/c you know if they commit 3 terrible crimes i dont think they are gonna stop
I think that being convicted a third time is a good indicator that the person is not going to change his/her behavior and that society needs to be protected from him/her.
As a disciplinary action, I am for it. As a tax payer, I am against it.

If you do the same stupid thing AND GET CAUGHT three times, you haven't even learned enough to become a better criminal. You are a useless drain on society. Please go away. I don't want to deal with your huddled mass.

But then I get to foot the bill for the rest of your life. I get to pay for all your meals, your housing, all the basics for sustaining life. You can complain that prison isn't much of a life, but it was your foolishness that put you in. You get three hot %26 a cot, no charge.

I have decided that if I have any major medical problem, I shall commit some crime with a hand gun. I will jaywalk with a hand gun. $15 fine for the jaywalking, two years for any crime with a gun. And I get some sweet medical care, free of charge.

Nah, that last part isn't true, I'm just upset because I have no health care.
We studied in crim law that punishment has several goals: rehabilitation, deterrence, retribution, and incapcitation. The 3 strikes rule is meant to incapacitate people. The idea is that after 3 felonies, the state of CA doesn't want those criminals committing any more crimes, so they put them away for good. I believe that a balance between each goal is good. The victim wants justice and so wants a sentence that is proportional to the crime at least (retribution). We want others to be deterred from committing the crime and the person who is committing the crime as well (general and specific deterrence). We want to rehabilitate the person so they don't do any more crimes by forcing them to get a job and check in with a parole officer while on parole (rehabilitation). Finally, we want to remove criminals from society if they cannot be stopped.

If the criminal keeps on committing crimes and violates their parol, what can we do? You can't rehabilitate people who don't want help. As someone who tutors high school kids in the inner city who later go to college, I don't see any legitimate excuse for committing crime after crime and running with gangs.

The question is whether the 3 strikes rule has benefited society. If you find that crime has gone down since it started and the extra costs to tax payers is worth it, then you can't argue against it. If on the other hand, the statistics show otherwise, then it is a failure.

Policy makers weigh the costs associated with crime against the costs associated with the judicial system

Check your statistics and you will find the answer
I am assuming that you are referring to the California version.
There are two major problems with most three strikes laws (including California's).
First, most of them include minor offenses in the three strikes. While I see no need for a third chance if the priors are violent offenses and would look them up for life on the second violent offense, I have trouble with looking up a person for life for the fourth bad check.
Second, most three strike laws establish the mandatory minimum only if the prosecutor chooses to charge an offender under the three strike laws. While a little discretion on the part of the prosecutor is a necessary part of the system, a three strike law gives too much leverage to the prosecutor (even if innocent how do you turn down a 3 year sentence when you will automatically get life if you go to trial).

My own preference is to increase the percentage of sentences to be served before being eligible for parole and to increase the sentencing range available to judges. Most judges will give stiff sentences to those repeat offenders who commit serious offenses while taking into account an appropriate balance of criminal history and nature of offense for less serious offenses.

Of course, increasing percentage of time served will require additional prison space, but so will mandating life sentences for repeat offenders.
I think it is 2 strikes too many!
I think it sucks, and no, I have never been convicted of anything other than traffic, and the last ticket was twenty years ago. I think it is exercised primarily on minorities and poor people who get stuck with public defenders. If the crimes are not violent or against children, I do not believe in throeing human beings away.

What do you think about Porn on the internet ?

Should it be harder to access ?

Not be here at all ?

Open for all to veiw without any age limits ?
Answers:
I like rough sex but Internet porn has violence that sickens me. It is the ultimate cold shower. I like being spanked playfully, but the Internet porn sites are brutal and brag about being so in their sales pitch.
there are more porn sites than any other type - it's here to stay
Violence is open for anyone to view with very little age limits. I don't see the big deal about sex.
I think it's great
its what made the internet popular. I doubt if it can be stopped
Definitely should not be available to everyone. Probably should be harder to access.
I try to view it daily
THE INTERNET IS FOR PORN
we as a generation have seen everything so i dont think its a big deal anymore
there's not enough of it...
It should be harder to access, parents need to make sure they know what their kids are watching, it should be open to view per local laws.
i wish i had internet when i was 13. i would never have left my room.
it is about as well restricted as it can be. 18 or 21 is a good restriction. although when i was 14 i got the internet at home. when no one was home i was all over it. "are you 18? click here!" HELL YEAH *click*
What happened the days when people thought sexual intercourse was in proper to show to the public?
without porn there is no internet
To anyone who wants to restrict access, I say, who appointed you to decide what I should look at? I want to decide for myself.
I have no problem with it as long as there are no children in the house.
i think that it should be harder to access because some pop-ups will be easy to access and u don't want to cut it off completely because lots of people like porn
Internet. 98 % porn... 2 % useless information.

You will never stop it. It is too lucrative.

Plus, if you somehow made it illegal in this country, it would just move to other countries and still be available.
Its your choice whether to visit these sites or not.

To be honest, it probably gets pretty boring after a short while. Not my idea of entertainment.
They should have passed the new .xxx domain when they had the chance.
no i think it is hard enough to access . if the parents want to stop there kids from seeing it then they have numerous options to stop them .
i certainly don't want child porn on here or that animal stuff .
or snuff shows and gross.com which i only saw once for a brief second should be banned and the owners shot.
I don't think it should be completely unavailable. It is legal to view pornography in your own home, so what's the difference if it's on video or on the computer screen? However I do feel that it shouldn't be as easy to access. Too many children browse the net everyday and see things that they shouldn't. Maybe someone should create a search engine that is for children only.. so that if a child types in something to search for, they aren't pulling up links to porn sites. That might work pretty well, too bad I just gave my idea to the world..lol
Everyone knows that young kids go onto the site... theres nothing they can do.. and basically they dont care, they pass there legislation of saying "are you 18"

i think its out of anyones control.

$80 is spent on it a second.
1. most porn sites are now hard to access
2. The internet would be boring without porn. You know how men think...
3. Porn sites today ask if you're 18 and above. Some require registration and e-mail confirmation. I would say, only the horny adults should be allowed to access...
i think there is way to much of it my gf and i were just typing in random words under yahoo images one night to see what would pop up words that may be a kid would use and every time porno poped up to easy to access yes there to many free sites were all u have to have is a email adress
Think of it this way, if there were no Porn on the internet, we would not be as internet savy as we are. Porn has driven the internet to new heights, streaming videos ect. Every search you have some sort of link to porn.
Should the access be harder, this is a free society so I say watch what your doing also your kids.
Not here at all, we are a capitalistic and if they wish to make their money that way, so be it.
Open to all, make sure by filters and such.
More.need more. :P~
I think it is great! GOOD IDEA and a great tool to keep track of the truly unusual twisted people out their! great tool to show what is some what normal and build data base on those that aren't. and even track their journey into depravity in some cases. The freedom should be available to everyone! hate to see them driven underground then we have no way of knowing just how bad the problem is. informashion in any form is not evil how it is used is and informashion cuts the pool of possoble suspects down.
should be harder to access for the young, but how? there is a fine line between sexuality and pornography, even adults have difficulty distinguishing...I don't like my kids having open access without any supervision, parental moral/religious discussions...

What do you think about NiFongs license being revoked over the outrage in the courthouse?


Answers:
If that's all that happens to him, he can count himself very lucky.
The man needs to be disbarred.
He got just what he deserved, ruining those boys name because he was trying to get elected again and used them as his campaign, now, he is crying, he is only crying cause hr got caught. I just hope he can never get his license back, but who hire him if he did, not me. I think he is a little goofy and a slight retardation of the brain.
I am in complete agreement with the Ethics panel that chose to disbar Mr Nifong; what he did was WRONG and the worst is that three innocent young gentlemen (and their families) suffered for the longest time before justice prevailed.

I not only think that Mr Nifong should be disbarred but I also think every attorney that helped him along during this case should be disbarred as well.

I also have an issue with the alleged victim of the attack. She said those three guys did it but then later changed her story. She helped to drag those three thru you know what and back.

I think those three young men (and their families) should consider suing Mr Nifong and a few other people.
its an outrage i think what justice does that do for people innocent and in jail now . i dunno i guess that weren't white and didn't have money, ya know its funny that no one called for Marsha Clark's license's hell OJ is still feeling the crap. i just hate America is the place for white and privileged i think its a sad day, a mans lively hood is taken because he thought that he was serving his community . and only reason anybody cares is because they were privileged. if that would have happened to anyone else,we would have never known and that's sad.
There are significant differences between the case in North Carolina and the O.J. Simpson matter. Ms. Clark's conduct was probably incompetent, but it wasn't grossly unethical. Mr. Simpson was found not-guilty, not because he didn't do it, but because a bungled investigation and prosecution made it impossible to prove BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT that he did it. Note that in Mr. Simpson's case, a civil jury later found him liable for the offense.

Mr. NiFong's actions brought disgrace upon himself and upon the entire legal profession, in that he violated many of the core principles that lawyers are taught and pledge to uphold. Disbarment is the appropriate sanction.

What do you think about money?

Do you think that it's crazy that we work our *** off for pieces of paper? I mean to work 40 hours a week for green pieces of paper is crazy to me. But if we stopped using money what else would we use for currency? Trade? Is money a good thing instead of trade?
Answers:
Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to become the means by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of other men. Blood, whips and guns--or dollars. Take your choice--there is no other.
you need it to survive
I like money. I don't see how credit would be possible under a barter system. =P
i think its corrupting the world and people so
If there were no curency then we would go "back" to using trade or barter-ship. No your not crazy I have often thought that money isent really worth its value. Paper is more less a note to say that this is how much gold you have, and you dont carry around gold nuggets like they did back in the old days.
YOU... and Every Body... ELSE. simply. TRADES THEIR... TIME. at work. for the Funny Green. STUFF!

YOU... can't live without IT?

Thanks, RR

Love the UK. TOO!
I do as well - It seems odd and sureal to me somtimes to look at that piture of Queen Elizabeth on a 20 - and know it is somehow connected to me eating -

I would like to go back to more of a barter system

It can be done - there are groups dedicated to it - In our society though money can not be replaced - it's use and need can be lowered but not to zero


The idea of barter - ensures that if your willing to do somthing you won't starve and it is near impossible to become rich - I think both of those things are good -


Some in our society have far too much and do nothing for anyone - they contribute little to society -

Barter is a way of limiting their power and limiting someone else's likelyhood of starving - I support both of these concepts

But as to the money itself Yes I have often had that thought as I look at a picture of the Queen on the 20 and Sir John A on the 10


Hmmmm that = an hour of my time ? How does that work any way
Well for one thing it's easier to use money to trade with then other things. I mean I'd rather have a wallet with 20 bucks in it then having to drive and walk around with a pig or a cow on a rope. Just seems more practical.
Bartering with goods is far less exploitable than currency. This is what civilizations did before currency was invented.
It's ridiculous that we let money rule our lives! I wish the stuff was never invented! Money causes people to do horrible things! And act in horrible ways!!
I think it would be cool if currency and wealth in general were something that could not be hoarded, but must be kept in the economy to avoid disintigration.

After all, the wealth of a society is in the FLOW of money, in the consistency and volume of trade, not in big sacks of money under M.S. CEO's house.
the money is not every thing in this life Ithink that sharing love with people and feel their pain and help them making you very happy be happy friend
Money is simply a means of facilitating transactions. The money itself holds no intrinsic value, only our willingness to accept it for goods and services makes it valuable.

How do I know that? If some horrible disaster happened, and disrupted our manufacturing and transportation systems, money would quickly become worthless as things like food, water, gasoline, and medicine would rapidly become more valuable.

That being said, it's too difficult to keep stores of valuable items for trade with local and far away merchants. Money enables us all to buy and sell easily. It doesn't have to be dollars or Euros. Those are just the means our governments picked and that we are OK with.
Money to me is no big deal. I've lived without it most of my life and I too have worked hard to get it. It's just how life works. You work, get money, pay bills, and are broke again. It's a vicious cycle that never ends. Money makes trade easier. I think we would all be working just as hard at bartering w/o money as we do with it. So in essence money is bartering. Money isn't the root of all evil itself its the people that spend it. So if money was absent from the equation it wouldn't really matter. People would still be ruled by some form of greed.

What do you think about Dr Freud drean theory, Do you agree with him.?

What do you think about Dr Freud dream theory, Do you agree with him?
Answers:
He was a nut-job. Why listen to a man that was in love with his mother and scared of his penis?
Freud was a total crackpot. No, I don't agree.
he says woman like men because they want willys crazy rubbish
First... what the hell is this doing in Law %26 Ethics?

Psychiatry is not an exact science and on this Freud was very inexact.
No, Freud was a psyco and should have been locked up in a mental ward.
well, i don't know what freud's dream theory is...however, current dream research views dreams as a result of the mind being unable to completely shut down during sleep and random thoughts, scenes from the day, or concerns about life, family, occupation, etc., continue but are jumbled up simply because you are not conscious and therefore unable to keep them coherent. it is very interesting stuff...
The academic trend today is to discount Freud as a complete nutcase. Sadly, that attitude is embraced by our universities chiefly because some of his theories are discordant with modern day political agendas. For example, you can imagine what modern day feminists feel about his idea that girls at a certain age develop "penis envy."

Don't listen to these people, they have a vested political stake in villifying the man and making him look foolish at every opportunity. The best thing for you to do is read him yourself, and judge each of his theories on their own merits.

What do you think about congress's retirement plan for themselfs?

Congress does not pay into social security but they have authority to juggle the funds and pay people that have't put any funds into it. Congress's retirement is paid for by the taxpayers out of lthe general fund which is a catch all fund that they keep well supplied. Maybe if they had to pay SS they would take better care of out retirement fund. Also they should cut out all the extra bennies they get and not collect their retirement until the same age the rest of us do. Members of congress are just like the rest of us they put their pants on one leg at a time. This job is no more important than the job you hold.
Answers:
Let's take a step back on this one and simplify it a little bit.

If YOU were a member congress and got to choose your own retirement plan, would you choose:

a) A lousy retirement plan.

b) A great retirement plan.
True, but the keep stealing from the Social Security Fund, wasn't it 2 Billion this year, never pay it back, then complain it is going to run out. Well yea, they stole all the money, which I pay into, and have for 50 years!

They are all well paid and have great Bennie's, but not like the corporations and health care. Anthem's CEO made 2 Million with a 12 million dollar bonus, for taking our money and giving some back to us! He has a better golden parachute than any member of Congress, and that is one fairly small HMO! He then gives our money to his stockholders, and deny us benefits!

They both rob from the poor!
This is the same group of scum that voted themselves raises while ignoring the minimum wage for years. The only thing they care about is themselves, and the lobbyist dollar.

What do you think about American Justice?

Check out the following blog.
www.smokeveil.blogspot.com
Answers:
It sucks, it protects the guilty.
It is slow and expensive. $=Gain
By the rich, of the rich and for the rich.Kinda like a conservative.

What do you think about a personal injury lawyer endangering tens if not hundreds of people?

This fellow Andrew Speaker ignored medical advice and flew to Europe, then while there finds out that he is really contagious with a very dangerous form of TB.
Is this about what you would expect out of a Trial Lawyer?
Answers:
I'd get a lawyer and sue him!!
I hope anyone who got sick from him sues him into the dirt.
Thats what he deserves.
I hope he gets locked away for good! If someone catches this illness from him it could be considered murder. It makes me sick thinking about how selfish he was!
He was not told that travel was forbidden and was told that there was little risk nefore he traveled. The Drs. did not know the nature of the particular strain of the virus until he was already in Greece for his wedding. He was then advised that the best hospital for treatment of his particular strain was the Denver Jewish Hospital; but he was in Europe %26 had no way to get back to the US except by air. He feared that if he went to a hospital in Europe he'd never get back to the US %26 what he believed was essential treatment. It should be noted that his wife, her daughter, %26 all the people who attended his wedding have tested negative.

What do you think about a Judge suing a cleaner for a pair of pants?

57 million dollar for a lost pair of pants which was found and try to give back to the judge and he is crying in the courtroom.
Answers:
I think he is a walking ad for tort reform and shows pretty much most of what is wrong with our civil legal system. They were *pants.* Any damages should have been limited to the cost of the pants or if part of a suit the cost of a new suit and maybe, maybe a $100 for the hassle of having to get new pants.
I think that the person suing is an idiot and I'm glad that he lost the case. The cleaners should sue him for all the aggravation that he caused. Luckily he has to pay them back for their legal expenses.
He should be drug out into the street and shot.

This is the epitome of all that is wrong with the legal system.
One of the more pathetic examples of someone of higher authority or celebrity status taking advantage of the law and reinterpreting it to their benefits. PATHETIC!
Just proves that some judges don't have the sense God gave biscuit dough...could partially explain some of the dumbass court rulings we've had throughout the years.
I think that it is a waste of tax dollars that they even allowed it to go to court! What was the judicial system thinking when they did not immediately throw the case out?
I think it is Rubbish!!
must have lost his robe.
He lost his mind somewhere along the way.
Wow, that judge is a big idiot.
ridiculous it only shows how judges are overpower same as police officers and feel they are God and deserve better than everyone else.

What do you think about "Industrial Relations Act Case"(XYZ v Commonwealth of Australia 2006(HCA))?!

Is it causing problems in the Australian society?! and how is it caused?! thanks for your answer... (^@^)...
Answers:
I am not sure. I guess no one else is either since I am the first to answer after all this time. Sorry.
SURPRISINGLY ENOUGH, I AM INTRIGUED BY THIS QUESTION. THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD ASK A JACKWAD QUESTION LIKE THIS AND EXPECT A STRAIGHT SHOOTER ANSWER IS BEYOND ME. THE FACT THAT I WOULD TAKE THE TIME TO WRITE THIS DOWN IS EVEN WORSE. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, AUSTRALIA IS A BIT OF A GONGSHOW OUT IN THE BOONIES ANYHOW, WHAT WITH ALL OF THE ABORIGINAL INCEST, BOOZING, GAMBLING AND WHATNOT. IF IT WERE UP TO ME, I WOULD CHOOSE NOT TO HAVE ANY RELATION TO INDUSTRY , WHETHER OR NOT AN ACT OR CASE WAS PRESENTED. THREE CHEERS FOR ANSWERING YAHOO QUESTIONS WHEN YOUR PISS DRUNK!!

What do you say to the judge when someone else wrecked your car?

my dads girl hit someones car but she has no license, he has to see a judge about it what can he do or say? the woman she hit is suing for 6000 .
Answers:
The best he can hope for is to try to settle for a lesser, resonable amount.
If he let her drive his car without a license then he's liable for the damages, and could face charges for reckless behavior!!
wasn't me
usually you get arrested for driving without a licsence. but i guess this is not the case. if there was no police report taken. ur fathers girl could work somthing out with the person. like a payment plan. this is something you do not want to deal with in court. unless u can beat it!!
In the state of TN, whoever owns the car is responsible for whatever happens in the car.

What do you say now? Bush finaly admitted that his bill is Amnesty!!?

You know, I've heard all the rhetoric鈥攜ou've heard it, too鈥攁bout how this is amnesty," Bush told advocates of his immigration overhaul. "Amnesty means that you've got to pay a price for having been here illegally, and this bill does that."

Thanks for admitting it GW. Now it's time to defeat the bill
Answers:
If these criminal get amnesty ...then I wonder want other crimes will get amnesty..just those crimes that indirectly benefit the wealthy??

Time for increasing the punishment for entering illegally, other countries use capitol punishment against illegals and invaders.....if the government doesnt have the stomach to defend the USA, there are people out here ready willing and able to defend our country, and this is not an extreme example or criminal suggestion....but why cant we defend our own country against invaders ??
Yes defeat the bill!
We've all known it was amnesty. So, get over it. Call your congressman and senators and tell them to nix it. You won't get anywhere on this site.
This bill will pass. Long live shamnesty.
Absolutely agree. ;) A simple NO vote on cloture by the senate this time will do the trick. Contact them again and again reinforcing this principle.
bush is an idiot thats why everybody makes fun of him;
in family guy, his own show lil bush, and robot chicken and tons of those shortsd online
He's just brilliant isn't he? Everyone has always known that this bill was amnesty. Once again El Presidente Jorge Bush as gotten his way. Oh the Democrats stink too.
Hmmm...It looks to me like Bush doesn't know what the word amnesty means then.

Amnesty is a pardon. The bill requires a fine, and I believe the head of household has to leave the country and apply for citizenship. I'm not saying that's harsh or anything, but it's just not amnesty. The immigration issue is unbelievably complex. The fact of the matter is, we really need to focus on stopping more from coming in, rather that worrying about the ones that are in already. Like it or not, that's what will be most effective and realistic.
i have never figured out why it has taken 7 years for people to realize bush is not on their side. the corporations he represents want cheap labor at any cost. he will love to listen to your opinion on abortion though.
This bill needs to be shot down!! I will be so ashamed if Bush pushes this bill to pass.
Please if there is a better solution what to do with 12 million people than why can they not find it? We are in a way complicent in the failure to keep these folks from working in our country. Business took advantage of cheap labor and after 20 yrs nothing has been done to stop all this.
A blanket policy "amnesty" is just a word. How about the $5,000 required or the return home to get reprocessed to enter again?
In my opinion it is the term that is failing us not the idea to make something happen to resolve this issue. Thank you.
So if Bush used amnesty ? Sure whatever it takes to get this out of the way and move forward. That is not admitting defeat in my book, That is being diplomatic, Nothing else seems to work?!
I am a republican and you are right .
No amnesty for cash .
whatever bush should go to h*ll let's make him pay for living in the U.S. I'm going to talk to the governor
Let's get this straight. It's Ted (the drunk) Kennedy's bill not Bush's. Teddy has been trying to get this bill through the Congress for quite a while now. It wasn't until recently that Bush stuck his two cents (about all it's worth) into it.

What do you make of this? This guy installed a new HVAC system at a business. Gives a 5 year warranty. Then

two months later his phone is off and cannot be found. The Hvac system hasn't worked right since. We found this guy and knocked on his door at his house. Found out he is still in business and demanded he come fix the problem. Should we sue the creep anyway? Who can we report him to?
Answers:
Of course, the first step is to contact the contractor and see if he will voluntarily act on the warranty. If that does not work, I would then report him to the attorney general's consumer protection department of the state where you live. The AG's Consumer Protection Office requires you first try to work out an accommodation with the other party. I like to use the governmental agency because I don't want to spend money suing somebody when the government will take care of it for me. I live in Pennsylvania, and I would use this website to get started in the complaint process. http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/complaint...

If you live in Maryland, you would use this website: http://www.oag.state.md.us/consumer/...

If you live in New Jersey, you would use this website: http://www.state.nj.us/lps/ca/ocp.htm...

If you live in New York, you would use this website: http://www.consumer.state.ny.us/...

If you live in West Virginia, you would use this website: http://www.wvago.gov/takeaction.cfm...

If you live in Virginia, you would use this website: http://www.oag.state.va.us/consumer/inde...
You can report him the the Better Business Bureau(BBB). You can take him to small claims court.
LOL; call it Karma!

What do you make of Romney's huge gain in CA?

A recent Sacramento Bee poll was released that shows Mitt Romney has a huge lead in CA.
I am pretty skeptical, but if it is true, it is huge. If Mitt wins California he wins the nomination. Here is a link to the article on Dry Fly Politics:

http://mydryfly.wordpress.com/2007/06/15...
Answers:
I think Romney has the momentum to win. He's winning in all the early primary states too.
The fact is that he is gaining votes not from any of the other candidates, but from the "undecided" candidates. His momentum keeps growing, and it is leaving the others stagnant.
This means that soon the others will fall into two camps: those that are looking for a job in the new administration (Rudy Guliani has no other job) who will come out to support him as he moves closer to the nomination; and those who must come out slinging mud (John McCain has a job as a US Senator, and doesn't need to work in the new Administration.)
Romney has the key ingredients to win: Money; Organization; and Appeal. He keeps growing, others keep staying stagnant.
The nomination isn't over yet. It is a long way to go from here until the first results start coming in. But the nomination is now Romney's if he doesn't make a mistake. To date, he's only shown a very professional, very strong personality. It's his to lose, but he doesn't seem to be losing it.
Not good

Republicans can do ALOT better than Romney. We shouldn't settle for him.
That's why they call California the cereal state.

Take away the flakes and all you have left is fruits and nuts.
Last time I checked , we were at war with the Taliban. Why should we let one of their cousins inti the White House?

This one happened 150 years ago but I think its still relevant because Mitt Romneys Mormon church pardoned a terrorist mass murderer of Americans and protected the 100 or so other Mormons involved from federal prosecution!

It was September 11, 1857. A wagon train of 160 settlers on their way to California was massacred by a bunch of Mormons dressed in Indian clothes. 17 children under the age of 8 were spared and lived to tell their story.
1st. They dressed as Indians but after five days they changed tactics.
2nd. Then they went a bit away ,dressed back into normal clothes and acted like the Rescue Party who had negotiated a deal with the"Indians".
3rd, Then confiscated all the guns as part of the deal for "saving" the travellers and Mormon dissidents( who were the reason for the attack in the first place).
4th. Took everybody off a mile or so and shot them all. 2 men got away but were eventually tracked down and killed a day or so later.
5th. Took the 17 children they had not killed back with them to Salt Lake City.
6th. Got away with it. After a publicized trial, with the childrens own testimony admitted into the court, only 1 man was convicted and shot, John D. Lee. ( pardoned by Church 1960)

It ended up being called the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The first time in U.S. history that U.S. citizens were massacred on U.S. soil by religious wackos. This event is even more significant because the total U.S. population at the time was much smaller.(I dont know the exact numbers, maybe only 30 million or so) In todays numbers it would be around 1400 dead

What do you know about the USA PATRIOT Act?

Not on a political level, or in a right wrong kind of way, just besides the basics, what does it do that might take me a little longer to research online? (reaseach paper + me = LAZY BUM)
Answers:
that phone calls coming into the country or leaving the country can be listened to in order to gather intell on people who want to murder. The government is welcome to listen to my calls if it will help get those scumbags. I am smart enough to always assume my calls can be listened in on and I am fine with this one. It's not really a slippery slope because we know when the Gov. has gone to far. Get the evil humans Uncle Sam and I will help.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/patriot_act...
Puts governmental secrecy before the constitutional rights of our citizens...in a nutshell.

The idea is supposed to be good. Allow the government quick tools to combat terrorism.

However, any tool that treads on the constitution had better be well approved by the highest legal authority...and it really hasn't.
read 1984.
You know you could probably find actual text of Patriot Act. May be at websites for US congress or some other gov websites. Or even some other websites that talk about legal junk.

There's probably tons of discussion on it at websites like ACLU's websites. May be check out AEI or one of those 'think tanks' or whatever they're called.
You could do research comparing it to previous legislation. Alot of the things in it, that freak out the opponents of it, were in previous laws such as RICO and other organized crime laws.

What do you have to do besides Law School to become a Judge?


Answers:
Don't listen to the answers you've received so far. The answer is: it depends. There are several types and levels of judges. There are administrative judges that rule on things like workers' compensation, unemployment benefits, discrimination, etc. There are trial judges and there are appellate judges.

Often times administrative judges do not have to have a law degree. Sometimes they can just be well experienced in the field and familiar with the laws with which they will be using.

State trial/appellate judges and federal trial/appellate judges often differ. Some states elect their judges. Some states have their judges appointed by the governor, an appointment board, etc. Federal District Court and Circuit Court judges are *always* appointed by the president and confimed by the Senate.

To become a judge: although you do not have to go to law school to become some types of judges, it will make life and the application process much easier if you do and will open a wider range of judgeships for you. Go and do well. Then there are two lines of thought: find an area of law to excel in, or become experienced in several different areas. I, personally, think it is more impressive to be well respected in your field rather than little known in several fields. Third, make important contacts. Befriend politicians. Help out on campaigns. Make contributions. This will help you a) get elected or b) get appointed. Both processes are political.

Hope this answers your question.
Pass the bar. Be a lawyer, get experience. Get appointed or elected.
In most areas, get elected to the position. Some judges are appointed by city or county councils, but most areas do elections.
Apparently not much based on the idiotic renderings of some of them recently. Not the answer your looking for I'm sure, just my opinion of the low low quality we have on the bench these days.
To be a judge you only need to be appointed or elected. There is no requirement that you be a lawyer.
You do NOT have to attend law school OR be a practicing attorney. In fact, you don't have to do anything. Judges are elected (for the most part).
To become a judge you must first go to law school, pass the bar, get experienced in a particular field( most judges work in a particular field), and be working as an attorney for at LEAST 5 years. Majority of judges are elected although some may be appointed. Good luck!

What do you guys think of this and what are your views?

hello guys just seen this article this week on the yeahoo news i want your views on this subject please and what you think?
Jail population hits new high

Press Assoc. - 38 minutes agoThe prison population in England and Wales has reached a new all-time high of 80,977.

(Advertisement)
The record was up 174 on a previous high set just three weeks ago.

It means the jails are just 481 places away from their absolute capacity.

It included 415 prisoners being housed in police stations and 24 in court cells.

Director of the Prison Reform Trust, Juliet Lyon, said: "Forget rehabilitation - imprisonment is now reduced to a dangerous game of musical cells.

"Prison after prison is reaching its safe operating limit so people are being decanted into unsuitable court and prison cells.

"In some cases, they are stacked up in escort vans reeking of urine. This is no way to run a criminal justice system."

It came on the day it was revealed that prisoners were paid 拢2.5 million
Answers:
Simple solution: Kill all of them. Then, kill Tony Blair and his band of retarded cronies for allowing things to get to this level. Perhaps if there was some kind of actual deterrent, rather than the nanny state that we have just now, things would be different. As it stands, criminals are NOT punished, whereas decent, law abiding people are. The state of the UK is one horrible joke.
prison doesnt work
How many people that are in prison really deserve to be there. I am sure if they went through the books there would be 1000's of prisoners that could be released.
Bring back hanging I say
Indeed there are all sorts of auguments about who should be and who should not be sent to prison. I am tols that many people in prison should not be there because of mental health problems and many more would not have got there in the first place if they could read and wright. I don't know the answer but it would appear that the basic education is gong wrong sort literacy out and some of the problem will be ultimately solved. A
Attitude is different it will need a basic sea change in the ideas of some people in respect of "Rights" and "Duty" and right and wrong. In the meantime build more prisons.
It certainly shows how pathetic our civilization is. On both sides. One for all the crimes being comitted, and two for not building another prison somewhere (or building them bigger in the first place). I hate it when they try to be cost effective, yet they know that there will be a problem down the road.

Send 'em to France!
If you yourself are not incarcerated then what is the worry. If you do a crime you know without a doubt that if you do get caught the outcome will be Judicial punishment. To me the harder the punishment the less likely for re occurrence.
Doug Stanhope is right: 'We are a f**king failing species'
It's unfortunately a sad reflection on modern society...we all want to be safe on the streets, and make criminals accountable for their actions in the form of being punished.but there is a huge social cost to it all...

The government have a serious problem as they don't want the double whammy cost effect of having to pay to build more prisons...and top of that...they then have to pay people to staff them and the cost of keeping the prisoners there..but if they alternatively are seen to be soft on crime...i.e. tag potentially dangerous people and let them live in society.then that [quite rightly in my point of view] is likely to be seen as being soft on crime.which will be very unpopular amongst the public.

What is the answer.I'm not sure..but I think two areas that need to be looked again are drug use...as this causes an awful lot of crime in addicts needing money...

And then there is immigration...and I am sure that has added to the crime issue.
I think it is ridiculous. In an attempt to decrease the numbers of those being sent to prison on a continual basis, I believe rehabilitation programs should be instituted. In my opinion, if prisoners are allowed to educate themselves and earn a degree of some sorts, that alone will decrease the numbers of ex-offenders returning to jail.

The numbers provided above furthermore proves that the justice system has failed us...as a whole. I thought you are innocent until proven guilty. In most cases, you are guilty until proven innocent. There is no reason for inmates to have to endure traveling miles and miles in urine reeked vehicles and being treated like trash by correctional officers and whomever else. I understand if you did the crime, you have to do the time; however, there is no need to strip people of their dignity. It's silly and needs to be addressed.
The English speaking countries in Western Europe, the UK and Ireland, are alone in that a majority of people seriously believe that harsh prison sentences act as a deterrent. The rest of Europe has started to listen to behavioural sciences a long time ago.

Every study ever done by criminologists has shown that the only deterrent that works is the high possibility to be caught, and that training programs in prison are a very good way to prevent people from re-offending.

Of course in a society where money is the measure of all things, how do you explain to a shoplifter that he is going to be sent to prison while the banker ,who has got himself a million or two by interpreting the rules to suit him better, is retired with a golden handshake. The kind of resentment things like that breed is also, in my view, a constituent of the ever higher number of crimes against property.

Nobody is going to be a better person from being locked up for 23 hours a day and being treated like dirt. Those people come out of prison with a lot of rage and the need to feel powerful again. It is mostly only a question of time until they end up in prison again, and so the cycle starts anew with every single youngster that is sent to prison for minor offences against property, instead of being made responsible to the person he has offended against, and being taught better ways to deal with his personal problems within the community.
Apart from reducing crime and the number of criminals, this system would save the state, i.e. everybody, a lot of money.
I feel, though, that introducing a different system of justice would require an awful lot of work in the way of educating people, and a clamp-down on the lust of certain media for blood.

What Do You Guys Think Of Guantanamo Bay? Should It Be Closed Down?

Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sunday the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay for foreign terrorism suspects should be immediately closed and its inmates moved to the United States.

Powell said the controversial prison in Cuba had become a "major problem" for the United States' image abroad and done more harm than good.

"Guantanamo has become a major, major problem ... in the way the world perceives America and if it were up to me I would close Guantanamo not tomorrow but this afternoon ... and I would not let any of those people go. I would simply move them to the United States and put them into our federal legal system," Powell said.

"Essentially, we have shaken the belief the world had in America's justice system by keeping a place like Guantanamo open and creating things ike the military commission. We don't need it and it is causing us far more damage than any good we get for it," he added.

-----

What do you all think of this idea?
Answers:
The way America has been perceived has all ready been damage. One example the abuse of the Iraqi prisoners by the US troops having them photograph naked and setting dogs on them etc. The USA has broken human rights laws with this camp in Guantanamo etc. Basically you said it yourself about the damage worldwide.
They need to keep it open until a few more "Commit Suicide"
No we should not move it on to the US mainland , we should
move it to our Base in Diego Garcia.
Depends on who you ask. Terrorists like it...as it makes more.
Keep it open and one night a week serve PORK and take their Koran away so they cannot pray.
No way
It needs to be expanded and kept going.
I think that many of the people that have been held there for 2 or 3 years then released without ever being charged with anything will become the terrorist that they were falsely accused of being in the first place.
Personally I think We're bein too easy on the prisoners.But then Again I would appoint Dirty Harry Head of every armed branch of the govt.No matter what some whiny liberal trash is always gonna be complaining about how we treat people and crap.It won't make a dif.
Yes it's about time the Hilton was shut down, and put the b@$t@rd$ in main stream prison's stateside.
Sure, shut it down, and ship all of the prisoners to your hometown. After all, there's no baaad people in there, are there?
Yes, I believe it should be closed down because of the demons that are there. I realize that torture can happen at any place, but that place has been a home for demons way too long and needs torn down.
Gmo has never caused me any problems. Exactly who is it causing problems for?

When I go to bed i do not wonder when Gmo is going to get me.

It should be expanded, and the funding should be reduced.
Nope, keep them there.
No! It does not matter where you confine the suspects/terrorists, there are people that will always find issue with location. I would definetly not bring them on our soil though. Bad idea Colin! Furthermore, our Justice system has shaken many people's beliefs in it many years ago, in this scenario though, I see no alternative.
Indeed... the US is bashing China for his human rights... With Gauntanamo, it has lost a lot of credibility... How in hell do you do to seek human rights across the globe when the main global power cannot even preach by exemple...
Now China has seen the US exemple and is rushing again to increase their power over the population by violating even more the human rights...
So if you can close it... Make it a tourist attraction at least or rename it...
The USA can't aquire a better foreign property lease than in Cuba so closing it down is like dumping your personal vehicle because it reeks of alcohol abuse. Clean up the mess starting at the top or it occurs again elsewhere.
You do not walk away from one stink to start another. Hello?

As to the partisan's still present in Cuba they all deserve a chance to return home if God wills it so just drop all wearing
bright orange jumpsuits by parachute over North Korea on the next moonless night and let Allah decide their fate.
nope...keep shockin the sh*t out of them
The concept of having the detention cell is legitimate. The crcuial point is who are those inmates - are they genuine prisioners or political enemies?. Maintaining a cell in a distant land is always costly and difficult to maintain. I think having a cell is correct but should be used for fair games.
The issue has caused much damage to USA during and after Iraq war. It should be permanently closed down to undone the damage.
Ha you poor people who think Guanatanamo should be kept open. America has lost all credibility and respect because of the so called "war on terror". There was just a program on channel 4 the other day telling us how USA take so called terrorist suspects kids and wife hostage so they can get to them. Ha I laugh at the Americans. The more they treat our people bad, the more terrorism there will be.
If you live in USA now, i suggest you relocate soon as its gonna be one hell of a rocky future...

What do you feel should be the penalty for driving drunk?

I watched a show on Oprah yesterday and it just made me sick, To make a long story short, a wedding party was in a limo after a wedding and it was hit by a drunk driver, it killed and completely decapitated a 7 year old girls head and kiled the driver as well. The girl who was killed was the daughter of the bride and groom and the mother was on the side of the road holding her daughter's head. That man was convicted and sentanced to 18 years in prison and is now appealing that decision. I do not feel that it was harsh enough! These people who choose to drink and them proceed to get in the car a drive away should be made to pay for their actions, what makes them think this is acceptable behavoir. In my opinion if you drink and get behind the wheel you should be charged with attempted murder, that is just what it is, a total disregard for the lives of others. What do you think?
Answers:
This is a hot-button issue for me, too. I have long felt that a first offense should carry a mandatory penalty of one year in jail. A second offense should be a charge of attempted vehicular homicide, much as you said. Manslaughter at the least! For too long, these CRIMINALS have been treated with kid gloves; you hear about people with18, 19, 20 drunk driving arrests, licenses revoked, and they are still driving!! If we let it be known that the gloves are coming OFF and that they'll face stiff penalties for their actions, you just watch the death rates on our highways drop! I am in no way against the responsible consumption of alcohol, but driving while inebriated must be stopped.
never allowed to drive a car or purchase a car again
i have been caught for it before, there are cases that are severe and there are some that are harassment. if some one drinks 2 beers over an hours time does it really make them unable to operate a car? the law should be more about the ones that are sure enough impaired
Mandatory, ineligible for parole, no time off for good behavior 30 prison term to be served in solitary confinement.
I agree. I have seen too many people ruin their lives and the lives of innocent people by driving under the influence. There is no excuse for such reckless behavior, but as long as alcohol is available, and it's use an accepted form of recreation, we will continue to see the horrifying results that you saw on Oprah.
I would also like to see drunk drivers serve a lot of time in an ER, specifically the trauma unit. I would also like them to have to sit thru listening to a family talk about their grief. I would like them to have to serve on a clean-up crew...the people who clean up the scenes as the tow trucks are arriving.

What do you feel about this sentence?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070614/ap_o...

It is in Canada, but I would imagine their legal system isn't that different from the US. What do you all think about this? I guess the judge thought that if he went to jail, he would for sure be someone's girlfriend. And do you think that alternative sentences like this one could do more harm or more good?
Answers:
We have some problems in society and judicial system with people who are intermittent threats to society.

The judge lets them go with orders to get some kind of treatment. Some of them do not get that treatment %26 consequently put society at greater risk %26 they are caught and back in front of a judge.

The guy in the VA Tech Massacre ... he was diagnosed bad mental health problems, ordered to do outpatient treatment, he never got it, he got worse. The problem to be fixed there is that when someone is released ordered to get such treatment, there needs to be followup so the court knows if he not get it within X days and takes approopriate action to protect society,

There was the woman in LA who went to the emergency room but the nurses too busy to attend to her, Several people called 911 from inside the emergency room %26 they were in trouble because 911 is not supposed to be used from a hospital so the police came and arrested the dying woman. That is a system that is totally broken on several levels.

Paris Hitton was caught drunk driving, had her drivers license suspended, ordered to get alcohol treatment. She was in total denial, condinued driving DUI without the license, did not get the alcohold treatment.

There needs to be a process where people who are ordered to get some treatment, they file papers with the court acknowleging they getting the treatment from where, with the from where also filing papwerwork with the court that the treatment is for real, the person doing the right thing. If this paperwork not filed, the court needs to follow up with either the broken institution or the person at risk to society.

We have sexual predators, people with HIV, other risks to society. I feel like they need to be wearing some identification, like one of those GPS ankle bracelets to serve multiple purposes. Like a NASA 911 ... if any harm comes to this person from hostile persons in society, they are to be rapidly rescued before the hostile persons do more trouble. The NASA 911 bracelet would also capture evidence of the troublemaker, so that soon that person in the same boat.
I think he should go to Jail.
This ruling must have been handed-down by the judge as an experiment. Bizarre as all get out, though.
That seems absurd. Are they going to follow him around to make sure he doesn't find a new girlfriend? He should be sent to a mental hospital for 3-4 years.

What do you do when you suspect your mail carrier is watching your netflix before it gets mailed back?

At first it only took a couple days for netflix to report my movies returned. Now it is taking over a week, but only on popular movies. The foreign movies I get, like Japanese films and independent films only take a couple days. I think she is watching the mainstream movies but being that I live around stupid hill people in Arkansas, she returns the other films her simple mind can't comprehend on time.
Answers:
You can call both Netflix and the USPS and report that your movies are not being received/returned on time. Keep a log of these movies, which ones are taking too long to be reported back to Netflix, etc. Netflix should be able to tell if the movie has been reopened after you initially sealed it to send it back (like if she ripped it open and taped it shut again -- she has to open it, so she must have left evidence). If you find that your postal carrier is watching your DVDs before returning them, she will not only be fired but can be charged with a felony.
If you can't get proof and you are unable to stop her from going through your mail, I would recommend having your movies returned through your work mail system (ask your boss first, but it should be a different mail carrier and so you won't have that problem) or you can drop them off in a post box and make she sure never gets her hands on them at all.
Not much you can do without proof. Switch to blockbuster and you can return them to the store. Even get a free rental for returning a movie.
Wow! I can't believe it!
get off your butt, work out and get over it or call the USPS and get the person fired.
First, contact Netflix and see what they say. It may be something internal on their side. If that doesn't work, use a mailbox in different zip code, like send them back from work instead of home.
Report it to the police, what she is doing is illegal.
Instead of leaving your netflix to be picked up by your mail carrier, perhaps you should think about taking it to the post office yourself.
Ask her
Report her to the post office people , maybe they can rotate this chic with someone else. Then you will know if it is her taking them or not.And I would set up some sort of account with the netflix people and let them in in what is taking place.
lol, talk to her supervisor about what you just said. It is actually rather interesting on how it would be handled, since it is illegal.
Ah, come on the lady provides you a service the least you could do is let her borrow your movies.

Be care obviously you are one of the hill people, too, I mean you do live there don't you.
This has actually been happening to a bunch of people. Every time it doesn't show up that your movie was returned in 3 days report the movie missing. After this happens a few times, Netflix will investigate. You can also send an e-mail to Netflix. And of course, you can also write a letter to the local postmaster about your suspicions.
Call the Postal Inspector and initiate an investigation.

Netflix will send you e-mail when they receive your movies and when they send them. It doesn't sound like you're taking into account how long it takes Netflix to actually ship a DVD after receiving the previous one.
Actually if you can prove it you can get him /her in very serious trouble messing with the U.S.Mail is a federal crime even for a mail carrier and he/she of all people should know that but the key thing is proving it because with out that proof you have no case and that is a fact ,circumstantial evidence in something like your describing will not cut it.
Call netflix and then the Postal Service (they have Postal Police) just in case don't accuse anyone without proofs but ask to know what it's going on and express your concerns.

The day you return your movies give a call to The Postal Office to make sure the movies got into the mail office and not into anyone's home. Also call netflixs or email them. Keep record of time and date.

Postal workers are a problem that nextflix is investigating so they have put resources to help customers.
Do some testing, drop your popular movies in the mailbox at the post office, see how long it takes. Call netflix, ask them. The popular movies may come from a different warehouse then the other ones. I don't know. Maybe it takes longer to process them for some reason.

If it turns out something still seems funny. Call the postmaster and explain the situation to him.

What do you do when an employee steals from you?

What if:
1. She's pregnant and is about to give birth.
2. he's gay. His sister was raped and needs money to pay for medical and lawyer.
3. He's the only breadwinner. His mother is in the hospital and he has a dozen siblings.
4. He's of another race. He denies doing it and threathens to sue you.
Answers:
fire the person...duh!
1. Fire her
2. Fire him
3. Fire him
4. Fire him

Stealing is illegal and unethical.
A) Determine for yourself if the amount stolen was worth making a fuss over...

B) Make damn sure you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt!
All of the reasons you've given is not an excuse from her/him to steal from you. But if you are that kind and believes that it is better to forgive like what Jesus did, then forgive him/her. But if not, you can sue 'em for qualified theft.
Fire them and press charges. Period.
From 1 to 4 get rid of them. One has to be able to trust his/her co-workers.
contact your nearest law enforcement agency
Disregard their excuses! no one should steal from their employer, ever! no matter what the circumstances! Fire them immediately! Have a good day.
Do you have proof?
IF you do, sack them and call the police. No matter the circumstances, if they were that desperate for money they should approach you for and advance/loan. If you just sack them then they feel safer about ripping off their next boss. If you report them, they may try a more honest approach next time.
If you don't have proof then you can't dismiss them for stealing. I don't really know about the legal side of dismissing staff, but I'm sure you need a valid reason. If you have an alternative valid reason then let them go. If you don't, invest in cameras and other surveillance equipment.
Once someone steals from you, they have justified stealing to themselves. It only gets easier to steal after this. You cannot continue to trust this person with your welfare.
As for the individual cases, for me it makes no odds. You as an employer have a responsibility to your staff. Not your staff's family. If they choose to steal then they are aware they are taking a chance, no matter the driving force in their decision. You cannot help them by letting them get away with it even once and long term, you only encourage the behavior if you go lightly.
wait til she has the baby then kick her a.ss
kick all their a.sses
none of the things you listed are important. If the person steals they steal, it's illegal, you turn them into the police. You also turn them in to the attorney general of your state and ask what further steps you should take.

Of course it depends on how much they stole (and if you have proof via camera or proof in your records, or their signature on something) as to how much time they get in jail. Once you found out they stole from you you bring them into your office and put them on temporary leave (that's a safe term and allows you time to think, and time for court) Line up a temp worker to replace them if the work needs to get done in your company. You are bound by law to report a crime so you must at the very least get your report to the police. After that your attorney will advise you what to do..
1. Report and claim my appraisal award from governments and earn my luxuries and comfort prospection life. haha...
2. Report. and as before described.
3. i cover up and help indirectly.
4. Deport him right away no question asked.

What do you do to take a restraining order off thats court appointed?

My husband and I got in an arguement and with out need the police were called and they took us both to jail on domestic violence. We aren't mad at eachother we just wanna be a family and raise our little girl together, but they put a no contact for 1 month and a half.
Answers:
You need to go to the local court where the restraining order was pronounced and ask for a rehearing before the judge that made the order. In the hearing you will have to convince the judge that you two can get along and don't have to wait for the 1 month.. However, I do suggest you take this time as a cooling period. If people that don't even personally know you were able to see through your situation that it was a dangerous one for both of you, then I think you should seriously reconsider and NOT ASK for the restraining order to be lifted... Enjoy your life in peace..
must have been one hell of an arguement to make the court want you two away from each other.
The court may see this as best for the child.
Have either one of youconsidered this?
the person name as victim has to petition the court to drop the order. make sure it is the right thing to do, a small percentage of victims regret, or didn't live to regret that decision.
Either do the 1 1/2 months or you have to appear in front of the judge again and ask that it be removed. Whomever filed for the ex parte order will have to be the one that requests it to be removed.

What do you do if your council is refusing to grant you a licnence to.?

carry out your business even though the government, office of fair trading, department of trade and industry and the National consumer council have said that it is unfair of them to do so and by doing so it imposes a risk on public safety and represses innovation.?
Answers:
You might consider talking to your the congressman for your district. While he may not decide to intervene, if what they are doing is illegal, he may know who to refer it to for prosecution.

Good luck!
i would take it as far as u can. talk to the c a b they may be able to help u more
Burn there houses down lol :-)
Hire a lawyer..
appeal?

seek legal advice?

or just do what a farmer did, and spread cow poo on the council building!!
You don`t say what your business is.
Even though you say that the Government?
Office of fair trading etc, etc, say it is unfair.
The Council might have reasons - which you don`t give - for refusing you a licence.

You need to be more `explisive` and give the reasons why the Council is refusing.

They may be correct we don`t know, we only have your word on the matter.
Hello Wayne - not sure what you mean about "a licence". There are not many businesses that need such a thing from the Council except maybe for pubs, clubs and the like. Give me a clue and I may be able to advise you. Use the website below to contact me and if I can I will give you some basic free advice.

What do you do if your college went bankrupt and you were in the third semester? And you worked for them too ?

Can I do anything about getting paid for the work I did before they went bankrupt. Can I find another college to take my credits????
Answers:
MTI was a small proprietary school in Houston. As far as your credits are concerned, you may be out of luck, but it depends on which program you were in there.
As far as getting paid, as an employee you are at the top of the list, but behind the tax collector, when any of the money that may be left is handed out. You are ahead of all the other creditors.
The bankruptcy attorney should be contacting you. if not, go see him/her. You must make sure the federal court has your claim.
(1) Another college will likely take your credits if they were general education credits and if your college was accredited by a major accreditation organization (like the "North Central Association"). They may not take them all, but since you're only a year and a half in, they may.
(2) Getting paid for the work you did -- depends... if you were on work-study, that money should be guaranteed by the government. If you were a regular employee, you're a creditor just like everybody else. Depending upon the type of bankruptcy that your college declared (Ch. 11 or 13) you may get a portion of your salary now, or you may get put in a "recoganization plan" where you get paid over time.

It doesn't hurt to contact an attorney, even just for an initial consultation.
Good luck, and I hope you get paid!
i am not neccesarily following your question here - which college are you referring to that went bankrupt?
if, and this is a long if, the college would go into receivership and loose its accreditation after students are transferred to other schools.
i have not heard of any colleges' bankruptcy so i would be highly interested in knowing which one you are talking about.

What do you do if you find out that someone went to a doctor and stole your identity to pay for the dr. visit?

I recently found out that I had a $995.00 bill from a doctor that i have NEVER even met. The physician's office reported it to a collection agency, and the doctor will take no responsibility, of course. The collection agency basically tells me, "tough luck, pay it." I have told them that I will not pay for something I didn't do. I have tried dealing with the doctor and the bill collector, but they tell me there is nothing they can do to help me. Is this true? The incident occurred in 2001 and I just became aware of the problem. I would greatly appreciate some help with this matter. Thank you for your help!
Answers:
It sounds like you were the victim of identity theft.

From the website below, here are measures you can taken directly from the FBI's website:

"If You are a Victim of Identity Theft

These steps are among those that should be completed by persons who believe they have been the victim of an identity theft:

鈥?Contact the fraud departments for the three major credit bureaus to place fraud alerts on your credit file in order to reduce your risk of further victimization.
鈥?Obtain and review a current copy of your credit report to determine whether any unknown fraud has occurred--(You will need to more closely monitor your credit going forward as some identity thefts can continue for extended periods of time).
鈥?Contact the account issuer(s) where fraudulent accounts have been opened or where your accounts have been taken over--Ask for the fraud/security department and notify them both via telephone and in writing.
鈥?Close all tampered or fraudulent accounts.
鈥?Ask about the existence of secondary cards.
鈥?Contact your local police department and file a police report.
鈥?Notify the police department in the community where the identity theft occurred, if it is different from your own.
鈥?Obtain copies of any police reports filed.
鈥?Keep a detailed log of who you talked to and when, including their title, phone number, and other contact information.
鈥?Contact the Federal Trade Commission's Identity Theft Clearinghouse and file an identity theft complaint at www.consumer.gov. Those complaints are utilized by law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, that investigate identity theft. You can also obtain additional information at that website regarding your rights as a victim."

You can report the identity theft at:
- www.IC3.gov

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/financia...

As for disputing the debt (not from the above website, my person opinion.

File the fraud claim with the FBI (only if you are absolutely certain that a fraud occurred, if you or your family were involved in a car accident or had any major operations that year there is the possibility that there could have been other Dr.'s involved in ER treatment or surgery and their office staff screwed up the paperwork) and send a copy to both the Dr. and collection agency.

Continue to dispute the amount in writing (don't deal with them over the phone anymore, indicate any future dealings need to be sent to you via written correspondence) and be certain to reitterate the doctor's office/collection agencies failure to meet due diligence requirements in trying to contact you within a reasonable period of time, which 6 years is not and is nearing the statue of limitations in most states where they could sue you, in which you could dispute the claim and file a report with the FBI so the person that committed the fraud could more easily criminally and civilly pursued.
Talk to your insurance provider, and if they don't help, ask to speak to their manager and keep working right up the ladder, if they don't help, or say they can't, let the head honcho know you are going to file a lawsuit against the matter and see what they say then. If you can prove it wasn't you that seen the doctor for that bill, then they CAN NOT legally make you pay for it.
You need to get in touch with the Credit bureaus, all three. Trans union, experion and I cant think of the other one. Let them know you were fraudulently billed and they can take the charge off. It happened to me with my identity. Someone stole my DL and used it to get two cell phones and racked up over a thousand in calls. They will help you through it. Good luck.
Bull. Go to the doctor again and say "pull up my file" I want to know my blood type, color of my eyes, height, weight. That info is going to be different than what is standing in front of you"who is me"right now. Want to try to explain that in court?
So you doctor, looked at somebody else.

That is my first response.

The doctor could send bills to anyone just to get money without seeing anyone.
Since the doctor thinks the patient is you, request copies of all medical records. There should be information in there that would contradict your actual status.
 


What do I do © 2008. Design by: Pocket Web Hosting

vc .net