High Court hears gun permit case

[error]

Yeah, you can file the lawsuit the day the bill is signed into law. The ACLU does this all the time.

[lildog]

The problem is really this, that no one reads or knows the contents of their constitutions.

And the anti-terrorism law enforcement officials say that if you quote the Constitution, you might be a terrorist.

Just because you know what it says in English doesn't mean you'll understand it in legalize.  Remember our court system is always finding new and interesting ways to read plane English in ways different then Webster's translates it to mean.

[lordmetroid]

Doublespeak is all over society as well as in the law as in the common tongue of the people. Communist practiced this way of oppression and it wouldn't be fair if such tradition just died with the Soviet 

[lildog]

Some of the discussion to the article I wrote up on this issue lead me to research a little further.

Here's the link again to my article:
http://www.nhinsider.com/richard-barnes/2007/5/11/concealed-guns-constitutional-or-not.html#comment823586

What I found was before having his license revoke Edward sued the town and won for their dealing out illegal contracts to town employees.

http://www.dovertaxpayers.org/pdf/court_order03-27-07.pdf

Suddenly soon after they find cause to take away his conceal license?  Hmmm....  Something doesn't smell right.

[Dave Ridley]

The best laws are those which simply repeal other laws by removing text from the statutes.

[cyberdoo78]

Exactly. Allow a man to best choose how to fix a problem. Allow small groups of men to decide how they will fix a problem, so long as the understand they have no power other then what each individual has the power to do.

Stop making new rules because I can't keep track of them all. I find that I may be breaking the law if I decide to scratch myself in my own house.

[lildog]

Stop making new rules because I can't keep track of them all. I find that I may be breaking the law if I decide to scratch myself in my own house.

I found myself thinking the same thing reading a write up about a bill they are pushing this week or next which limits the number of hours a nurse can work.

The problem they are trying to fix is sometimes a nurse is asked to work a double shift if the replacement doesn't show up on time for work.  This leads to tired nurses trying to care for people.

The problem I can see with this new law would be having NO nurse there if the replacement nurse doesn't show for his or her shift.

So what's worse?  A tired nurse working far too many hours or no nurse at all because a law requires them to rest after so many hours of work?

[cyberdoo78]

So what's worse?  A tired nurse working far too many hours or no nurse at all because a law requires them to rest after so many hours of work?

Isn't the real problem, we don't have enough nurses to cover for those who call in sick who then force other nurses to have to work double shifts? And who's fault is that after all. My wife looked into nursing, they want a $50,000 policy in case you accidentally kill someone. Guess who foots the bill, the nurse, not the company she works for, who would be more inclined to cover the cost, if they weren't fighting off lawsuits right and left made by the family of the injured or deceased.

People, these doctors and nurses are there to treat you in your time of need. It does no good to sue those who are willing to help you. They are human, just like you and they make mistakes. Take $100,000 from the insurance company and get on with it. This is the reason I don't give anyone CPR, because they might sue me for their injury, or their family if they die.

Get government out of health care, they are the problem and not the solution.