Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Annoyed]

Why does that matter?

How about enforcing the law?
If the charges the young lady had been true, there would have been cries for "Off with his head" and few would have argued with them. But because she was the "victim" in her version of things, she's given a pass?

[Ian-S]

Then why has it taken 15 years to GET that measly 1% paid?? Has she been in jail? Not to my knowledge.

I don't know specifically about US civil law but it's loosely based on British Civil Law and in that (as long as you know what you are doing) in general a persons ability to pay is taken into account when settlements are awarded, so a claimant could be awarded a million pound in compensation, but if the defendant is living in a homeless shelter on £60 unemployment a week then they are only going to be ordered to pay what is left after essential expenses, which could be as little as £1 a month.

Perhaps she was unemployed for many of those 15 years, or had kids, even the SS Courts are not so nasty as to make a defendant pay a creditor over feeding their kids.

I do agree with the general sentiment shown here that if someone is proven to be lying they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, I had a friend who was accused of rape many years ago, it turned out to be a total lie, the woman? Nothing was done to her, my friend? They had to close the park to cut him down from the tree he'd hung himself from after the case was thrown out, although he was innocent, the toll it took on him was to much too bear, he'd lost his job, his family and eventually his life, all because the office bike didn't like that he'd rebutted her approaches.

[Gatefan1976]

On that issue, do you not think states should have the right to control/make laws for their OWN people?? Or must all subjucate themselves to the all mighty federal government?

They can make what laws they want that are not covered directly by the constitution, that's the way your government is set up. If they contravene federal laws, I see no issue with the fed withholding money to the states, that's also the way your government is set up.

If so, then i take it you are NOT ok with states making their OWN laws/rules that run contrary to federal law (like in all those damn sanctuary states/cities)? Or like DC and Colorado did in legalizing mj??

They are free to do it if they want, but they have to wear the consequences of those actions. Federal police still can bust someone in Colorado for having pot if they choose to.

[Gatefan1976]

How about enforcing the law?
If the charges the young lady had been true, there would have been cries for "Off with his head" and few would have argued with them. But because she was the "victim" in her version of things, she's given a pass?

She is paying what she can, she has not been "given a pass" at all. given a pass would have had the debt absolved, and that has not happened.
The ruling is being enforced.
What is your issue?

[SoulReaver]

If so, then i take it you are NOT ok with states making their OWN laws/rules that run contrary to federal law

depends - if the state law makes something federally illegal legal then it's all good - on the other hand if it makes something federally legal illegal, then no-no

basically if the local law gives people more rights than what national law does on a particular matter then so much the better

[garhkal]

It's not, it's calling someone -continuously Mr or Mrs- when they obviously don't like it or are presenting as something else that is the Douchebag move.
If you came into my store and you were "presenting" as a man, and I kept calling you miss, I'm sure that would annoy you as well

So we should call someone what they Want/feel they are, not whom they are??

Why does that matter?

Cause it shows that she has had so far, no intention of honoring her debt incurred from the loss of her suits..

How about enforcing the law?
If the charges the young lady had been true, there would have been cries for "Off with his head" and few would have argued with them. But because she was the "victim" in her version of things, she's given a pass?

Not just that. BUT had the case gone her way and the courts ruled that those guys had to pay HER, i doubt we would have gotten past 3 years before there were cries to FORCE this lout to pay up. Let alone 15 years and barely 1% of what she ows...

They can make what laws they want that are not covered directly by the constitution, that's the way your government is set up. If they contravene federal laws, I see no issue with the fed withholding money to the states, that's also the way your government is set up.


They are free to do it if they want, but they have to wear the consequences of those actions. Federal police still can bust someone in Colorado for having pot if they choose to.

But as we have seen, the feds (especially under obama) seem to not CARE if a state violates federal law, as long as doing so supports a liberal agenda (SANCTUARY cities).. But heaven forbid it, if that state's law upholds a Conservative agenda...

[aretood2]

Suing someone is civil, not criminal.
Those annoying details.............

Except, if you don't bother to correct them, you have no argument either now, or under these "draconian laws"

I'm confused how a city ordinance can make a civil lawsuit viable in this case...especially with federal courts recognizing businesses as entities with 1st amendment rights. The whole article sounded off to me...

[Gatefan1976]

So we should call someone what they Want/feel they are, not whom they are??

What they feel they are IS whom they are.
Why is this a hard concept to grasp?

Cause it shows that she has had so far, no intention of honoring her debt incurred from the loss of her suits..

But she has been, so what is your problem?
She's not paying it fast enough for your liking?

Not just that. BUT had the case gone her way and the courts ruled that those guys had to pay HER, i doubt we would have gotten past 3 years before there were cries to FORCE this lout to pay up. Let alone 15 years and barely 1% of what she ows...

I suspect that if the shoe was on the other foot, the same situation would be happening.
Why?
Cause that's the way the law works.

But as we have seen, the feds (especially under obama) seem to not CARE if a state violates federal law, as long as doing so supports a liberal agenda (SANCTUARY cities).. But heaven forbid it, if that state's law upholds a Conservative agenda...

What is the Conservative agenda that is being targeted?
As far as I can see, what get's the conservatives knickers in a twist is having to deal with people as equals, not inferior.

[Coco Pops]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/ent...tion=australia

So let's see we could have cut pollution more since the 70s but because of profits and the need for more profits we thought "ah stuff it" and carried on...

Not surprising at all.

[garhkal]

What they feel they are IS whom they are.
Why is this a hard concept to grasp?

Cause most people don't SEE it as settled science..

But she has been, so what is your problem?
She's not paying it fast enough for your liking?

At what.. 50 cents a week??

I suspect that if the shoe was on the other foot, the same situation would be happening.
Why?
Cause that's the way the law works.

Its the way the law's SUPPOSED to work, yes. BUT we see all the time where double standards exist.

[Gatefan1976]

Cause most people don't SEE it as settled science..

Why does science need to be involved at all?
And who is this "most people", cause while you might get away with saying "most conservatives", you certainly won't get away with "most people".
"Most people" believe in marriage equality, (as does the SCOTUS) yet still we get idiots in politics (guess who) who will waste gobs of time and money trying to stop it.
The simple fact of the matter is, your belief is not required to make something a fact. "X" see's themselves as not the physical gender they have, that's a fact. Is asking someone to recognize that fact so damn hard? I mean, I call FH "dear" all the damn time, which is -generally-a term of endearment to the opposite sex. Now, as FH does not really identify as a female, I probably should stop doing it and switch to a more gender neutral appellation such as "mate", and IF FH asked me too, I would, no questions asked, no need to make a fuss or carry on.

At what.. 50 cents a week??

At whatever the court determines is within her ability to pay, and if that is 50c a week, so what?
Let me guess, You and Annoyed would be happy if they seized all their possessions and sold it all, leaving the stupid bint (and make no mistake, doing what she did was a stupid bloody thing to do) destitute, because that would be the "right (wing) thing to do"?
OK, so we sold her stuff, we have paid back what, 50K?
Where is the rest coming from?
Her Job?
Err........... Smelly homeless people don't get Jobs, in fact, they are a drain on the system if they can even get covered by the system, and IF they get covered by the system, the GOVERNMENT is paying their bills (so, YOU are paying back her debt)
Wow, such a good system, so financially conservative................

Its the way the law's SUPPOSED to work, yes. BUT we see all the time where double standards exist.

What double standards are you talking about?
You mean when corporations file for bankruptcy and have their debts absolved?
Yeah, what bright sparks thought that should be made easier to do?
I'll give you a hint, I'm looking at the Elephant in the room.................

[pookey]

I call everyone dear, must be a Brit/Aussie thing

[jelgate]

I call everyone dear, must be a Brit/Aussie thing

I thought it was more of a female thing.

[Falcon Horus]

On that issue, do you not think states should have the right to control/make laws for their OWN people?? Or must all subjucate themselves to the all mighty federal government?

Then what's the point of having a federal government or a president to preside over this federal state?

So we should call someone what they Want/feel they are, not whom they are??

If you want to be a computer database, I won't hold it against you if you refer to the people by their birth sexe.

However, humans do have a right to be refered to whatever they feel okay with. Therefor, you may refer to me as miss, dear, mate, Lemming (quite fond of that one), it, her, his, she, he, FH, Falcon, Horus or Finn.

I mean, I call FH "dear" all the damn time, which is -generally-a term of endearment to the opposite sex. Now, as FH does not really identify as a female, I probably should stop doing it and switch to a more gender neutral appellation such as "mate", and IF FH asked me too, I would, no questions asked, no need to make a fuss or carry on.

For the record, see above, I don't mind.

[Annoyed]

She is paying what she can, she has not been "given a pass" at all. given a pass would have had the debt absolved, and that has not happened.
The ruling is being enforced.
What is your issue?

If I get even something as trivial as a speeding ticket, and I refuse to pay the fines/court ordered fees and such, you can be sure I will be tossed in the clink long before 1 year passes, let alone 15 or whatever it is.
Oh, and btw, Fines & Judgements are not levied based on the ability to pay. My fine would be exactly the same as the rich guy down the street (assuming for the sake of discussion that he can't buy his way out of it altogether via lawyers.)

Why does this liar deserve special treatment? Didn't she deliberately try to destroy the reputation of the men she accused?