English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

my question referes to U.S laws

2007-02-22 05:57:43 · 4 answers · asked by christine 3 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

4 answers

Taxation.

2007-02-22 06:01:37 · answer #1 · answered by Michael E 5 · 2 0

I would have to go with Criminal Law (U.S.), as with the other question you've posed, A person in this day and age has little chance of getting a FAIR TRIAL because of the screwed-up system of legal representation. It is my firm opinion that Big-Brother has put together a system of dual purpose. In one aspect the homeless and un-educated are systematiclly dealt a double whamy. They are uneducated in even the slightest knowlege of Criminal Law thereby becomeing a VICTIM to the Court Appointed (Shyster) who's only interest is to plead the person and on to the next case. The second part of this dual purpose is to take the homeless and ineducated off the streets and instead of being a drain on the State, the State begins to collect $$$$ hundreds of thousands from Big-Brother to put in their piggybank. While I'm not so inclined to believe this is the case in every situation I personally have seen the profound effect this dual purpose (LAW) covering the EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE of COUNSEL. This is a subject that if properly researched would produce a PROFOUND EFFECT upon Society. The Court Appointed Attorney IS the biggest "contributor" to the prison population because of their disinterest in taking on a Court Appointment. The powers that be can paint this situation in any shade they like but, ask 5,000, Prison inmates who were represented by a Court Appointed Shyster verses 5,000 who were represented by a Paid Attorney and for those Attorney's who trully have the Constitutional Rights of your Court Appointed Client at the forfront of any " Plea-Agreement " I !!APPLAUD!! You!!. For you are trully the FOUNDATION of which the Criminal Statutes should be made. and just for the record, In todays Society, You Are "GUILTY" until proven INNOCENT!!. And furthermore, for those who would use the statistics cleverly put into play by the common interest ($$$$) I say to you, GOD SEE'S YOUR GREEDY HEART!!!!!

GOD BLESS/GOOD LUCK!!

2007-02-22 14:38:30 · answer #2 · answered by Chuck-the-Duck 3 · 0 0

Affirmative actions. There is no doubt that there was a period of time where minorities, women and others were treated differently under the law. However, these mandated quota system is unfortunately still in use. We do not need additional laws to insure everyone gets treated fairly. What we need to do is to interpret and enforce the constitution as it is written. Equal treatment and equal protection under the constitution is what is needed. Not additional burdensome laws.

2007-02-22 14:14:08 · answer #3 · answered by docholiday 2 · 1 0

regulatory

2007-02-22 14:13:51 · answer #4 · answered by bev 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers