Do red flag laws violate the Second Amendment and Fifth Amendment?
The red flag laws will be struck down as unconstitutional for several reasons.They violate the accused right to due process (5th and 14th amendment violation).Right to an attorney (6th amendment).Search and seizure (4th amendment)This is just partial list.The victim, yes victim, of a red flag law is not afforded the ability to stand in defense, nor have legal representation. The prosecution is not bound to prove guilt. The courts are under direction that a report the victim is a danger to themselves or others are based off just that the sometimes anonymous report. There is no challenge accepted. Once the confiscation order is issued and enacted the victim is bound by this law to comply (even though the supreme court has ruled citizens are not obligated to obey unconstitutional laws) on the threat of death.Only after the confiscation the victim is given a chance to appear in court to prove innocence. Which is backward to being innocent until proven guilty. The laws are open to abuse by angry family members and/or neighbors, teachers, etc…These laws cannot be overturned fast enough. They have already resulted in the death of one gun owner.
Can California cops detain someone who is not on probation if they didn't do anything wrong?
Being on probation usually includes a “three way” Fourth Amendment waiver. As a condition of probation, the probationer is subject to a search of their person, vehicle, or home at any time, without probable cause or warrant. Sometimes this search can be done only by the assigned probation officer, and sometimes by any peace officer. This depends on how the probation order is written and local judicial policies.The California Penal Code Section 3067 provides that any person on parole (not probation, which is handled as I described above) can be searched at any time, by any peace officer, without any degree of suspicion required. Parolees are felons who have served some prison time, and have been released conditionally. Probationers can be misdemeanants or felons, and may never never have been in jail or prison.This statute was tested in the case of Samson v. California 547 U.S. 843 (2006). A San Bruno, CA police officer saw Samson on the street, and knew that Samson was on parole. The officer also believed, erroneously, that Samson had an outstanding arrest warrant. Although he had observed no suspicious activity, he stopped and search Samson, and found methamphetamine on his person. Samson was arrested, and eventually returned to prison. The SCOTUS found that this search was constitutional and upheld the search, conviction, and sentencing.The law is similar with probationers, but there is more variation in the conditions of probation. Probation can be for misdemeanors or felonies, and the judge can impose whatever restrictions he deems to be appropriate. If the probationer rejects the terms of probation, the judge simply imposes the alternate term of imprisonment.All that said, the wording “if they didn’t do anything wrong” in the question is troublesome. I’d estimate that at least half the people I arrested claimed they hadn’t done anything wrong. For the arrest to be valid, the officer making the arrest must have a reasonable belief that the person arrested has committed a crime. The belief does not need to be accurate, only reasonable. Further, many people who seem to get into trouble a lot seem to minimize their culpability, maybe thinking that behavior X shouldn’t be against the law, so there’s nothing wrong with it.So, when I hear someone who is being arrested say, “I didn’t do anything wrong!” I know that’s often wishful thinking.
How does the above law protect citizens against human violation?
I am uncertain what you mean by a “human violation” so I will speak in more general terms with respect to any action that harms another as a “harmful action.”Generally speaking, the law can protect citizens from harmful actions in one of two ways: (1) by creating incentives for individuals not to engage in a harmful activity and (2) by placing individuals who have engaged in harmful activities in prison so that they will not engage in such harmful activities during their period of incarceration. In addition, during a period of incarceration, it is hopeful that such individuals can be rehabilitated but it is also possible that prison serves as a means for such individuals to trade information to get better at their craft, effectively making future criminality more likely when rehabilitation efforts fail.Aside from this, the law basically exists to punish those who engage in harmful action and, in the case of civil actions, is designed to make financially whole to the greatest extent possible those individuals who are subjected to a harmful action.
Why does Quora keep letting trolls answer and write questions when hundreds have already complained?
The United States Senate has released a pair of reports that looked at millions of posts on every popular social media platform from Facebook to Pinterest and showed that Russia has been involved in a "sweeping and sustained social influence operation." More than 30 million people shared content from the Internet Research Agency on Facebook and Instagram from 2015 to 2017.The Internet Research Agency operated a "troll farm" based in Russian President Vladimir Putin's hometown that employed hundreds of English speakers with "a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including ... supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaging Hillary Clinton."Virtually every topic involving Ukraine is polluted by these trolls.Yet, Quora has no response and does nothing about it.We all know that employees of Russia’s Internet Research Agency post hundreds of questions and comments on Quora daily. Often, when responsible Quorans call out this propaganda, we find our comments collapsed or deleted.It is positively irresponsible of Quora to pretend this is not a problem.
Was it wrong to carve Mount Rushmore?
I think what the questioner wants to know about was wether the site was appropriate for the sculpture. Mount Rushmore is smack dab in the middle of the Black Hills, which was promised to the Lakota (or Sioux) in perpetuity. The Black Hills were the one thing the Lakota valued about all else. Although the Black Hills are worthless wasteland useless for hunting or agriculture, the Lakota felt they were sacred. The American government didn't seriously think about denying the request as Europeans didn't see any use for them.Of course, soon after, gold was found in the Black Hills. The American government allowed violations of the treaty with impunity.Now, I don't think the sculptor was thinking of this when he chose the site. He was simply looking for someone to finance it. That being said, it could not have escaped the people who knew better that putting a huge monument to the United States in the middle of the most sacred land of the Lakota was insensitive to say the least. It would be like building the Osama Bin Ladin memorial at Ground Zero.Rushmore is still a sore point and, although Lakota elders are somewhat conciliatory about the whole thing, young people often take it upon themselves to desecrate the sculpture (without permanently damaging it) as a rite of passage.
What's the punishment for breaching attorney-client confidentiality?
Typically, it’s attorney discipline. This can range anywhere from a slap on the wrist to being disbarred. (To complete the picture, some of the stops along the way include mandatory legal education, public reprimand, or temporary suspension.) Each state has its own office to deal with such matters. (In Massachusetts, that office is called the Board of Bar Overseers.) They typically have wide discretion in crafting a punishment that takes into account all the circumstances involved in the breach.Depending on the result of the breach, the client could potentially have a civil suit against the attorney. In the civil suit, the client’s recovery would be limited to the actual damages caused by the breach. For example, if the breach involved accidentally disclosing harmless information to a limited number of people, the civil suit probably wouldn’t result in much. But if the breach involved intentionally disclosing either very damaging or very valuable information to the general public, then the damages could be huge.
When can the police pull over my vehicle?
A peace officer can pull you over with probable cause. That includes traffic infractions. They can pull you over if the see something that leads them to believe criminal activity might be afoot. That means they have probable cause to think you committed, are committing, or are going to commit a crime.Finally if you are on probation or parole, a minor, or their are other administrative reasons (government rules) such as being on a military base on on government property you can be stopped for virtually no reason other than you are on government property and can be stopped and searched. Another example of this would be if you were scene leaving the area of a stream or lake and checked to see if you were fishing.
Can the President pardon someone for a state crime?
No; the President only has executive jurisdiction over Federal crimes, so he cannot pardon someone for a state crime violation. Only the governor of that state has the authority and jurisdiction to pardon someone for a state criminal violation.See section #2 of the following: http://www.justice.gov/pardon/pa...
What 20th century performance art piece is the most life-changing?
Personally, I consider this one. Marina Abramovic is by no means my favourite performace artist, but you cannot deny her legacy in the field, and Rhythm 0:1974 really pushed the boundaries when it comes to the relationship between the artist and the audience.On a table placed near herself, she kept around 70 objects, some of them harmless, some of them which could hurt her. She then passively stood around, while the audience was allowed to do what it wanted with the objects on her person and manipulate her actions. Initially, there wasn't much violation of the artist's body, but over the course of 6 hours, the audience became more and more aggressive, some some cutting up her clothes and skin, some thrusting a knife between her legs, someone stuck rose thorns on her stomach, while another put a loaded gun to her head. At the end of 6 hours, as she had planned to, she started walking towards the audience, at which point, in Abramovic's own words, 'everyone ran away, to escape an actual confrontation.'I consider this piece seminal because it reveals an ugly side to humanity previously unexplored by more mainstream forms of art, limited as they are when it comes to either the artist or the audience becoming a part of the art process themselves. Performance art is one of the least understood and often the most, and admittedly, justly derided streams of art (giving 'birth' to eggs placed in your vagina to make a statement about creativity? PLEASE), but this piece truly compels you to confront the nature of humanity, its propensity to objectify and hurt without the least provocation, and if we truly are larger than our baser selves. If the purpose of art is to not merely please our aesthetic sensibilities but provide thought-provoking material, then this piece captures its essence perfectly.
How do I deal with a home appraiser when I have an illegal in-law unit?
Hi. I can only speak to how the law/code is, in Oregon, but it may be similar in your area. In Oregon, you can have a second dwelling, but ONLY if the particular zoning allows for it. However, "guest quarters" are not considered a 2nd dwelling on the site, if it does not have a kitchen stove in the unit. (They view that having a stove makes it a complete 2nd dwelling, which is not allowable in many zoning codes.) You'll want to check with your Planning Dept in SF to see what is considered legal, or you may have access to the SF City code online and look it up yourself. If it's similar to Oregon, you may just need to remove the stove before the appraisal is done.As far as an appraisal goes, if a 2nd unit is known to be illegal, it could only be considered guest quarters. If it is being used as a rental (2nd dwelling), the appraiser should be mentioning this in the appraisal report, but cannot give it value as a 2nd dwelling. (Having a "legal" 2nd unit would make it a 2-unit dwelling, and an appraisal report would typically have to go onto a different form and would likely make a difference in market value.) An appraiser has to follow Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) regulations and cannot write a report in a misleading manner. However, this doesn't mean that the appraiser to going to run to the city and tattle on you to the local assessor. You also might call up an experienced appraisal firm or appraiser in your area.