|
|
yusime
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
Yes it is a fact of life stupid people exist and make laws to reference their stupidity.
The range "stupid to sick to hilarious"
Alabama
Incestuous marriages are legal.
Putting salt on a railroad track may be punishable by death.
Men who deflower virgins, regardless of age or marital status, may face up to five years in jail.
If an animal control officer is in uniform, it signifies to the public that he is an animal control officer.
Arizona
Any misdemeanor committed while wearing a red mask is considered a felony.
Arkansas
The Arkansas River can rise no higher than to the Main Street bridge in Little Rock.
It is illegal to kill “any living creature”.
California
It is a misdemeanor to shoot at any kind of game from a moving vehicle, unless the target is a whale.
Colorado
It is illegal for fire trucks to exceed 25mph, even when going to a fire.
Florida
Women may not expose their breasts while performing “topless dancing”.
Idaho
Illegal for a man to give his sweetheart a box of candy weighing less than fifty pounds.
The English language is not to be spoken.
Law forbids eating in a place that is on fire.
Indiana
The value of Pi is 3.
Oral sex is illegal.
A man over the age of 18 may be arrested for statutory rape if the passenger in his car is not wearing her socks and shoes, and is under the age of 17.
If any person has a puppet show, wire dancing or tumbling act in the state of Indiana and receives money for it, they will be fined $3 under the Act to Prevent Certain Immoral Practices.
http://www.dumblaws.com/
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hilarious! I have a few comments and questions:
Putting salt on a railroad track may be punishable by death -
Especially if a train is coming.
Men who deflower virgins, regardless of age or marital status, may face up to five years in jail.
Does this refer to the age and marital status of the men or the virgins?
If an animal control officer is in uniform, it signifies to the public that he is an animal control officer.
Pest control.
The Arkansas River can rise no higher than to the Main Street bridge in Little Rock.
Who wrote this law? King Canute?
It is illegal to kill “any living creature”.
Is it legal to kill a brain-dead creature - the legislator, for example?
It is illegal for fire trucks to exceed 25mph, even when going to a fire.
Wow. The good people of Colorado must have an enormous insurance premium to pay.
Women may not expose their breasts while performing “topless dancing”.
But otherwise they may do so.
Illegal for a man to give his sweetheart a box of candy weighing less than fifty pounds.
Then he can take her to California and shoot her from a moving vehicle because she'll be like a whale.
The English language is not to be spoken.
This is applicable throughout the USA, where the official language is American.
The value of Pi is 3.
More or less.
Oral sex is illegal.
But if you do it without talking it's OK.
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Persons in possession of illegal substances must pay taxes on them. However, paying taxes on these items does not make them legal.
A three dollar tax must be paid on all white goods sold.
Organizations may not hold their meetings while the members present are in costume. [Guess this lets out the KKK?...Jon]
No one may be a professional fortune-teller, and if one wishes to pursue the practice as an amateur, it must be practiced in a school or church.
It's against the law to sing off key. [Yeah Eldon!]
Elephants may not be used to plow cotton fields.
While having sex, you must stay in the missionary position and have the shades pulled.
If a man and a woman who aren't married go to a hotel/motel and register themselves as married then, according to state law, they are legally married.
All couples staying overnight in a hotel must have a room with double beds that are at least two feet apart. Making love in the space between the beds is strictly forbidden.
It is illegal to have sex in a churchyard. [Brings a new twist to the phrase "waking the dead."]
Oral sex is considered a crime against nature. [Dudes, I'm in a world of trouble now!]
A marriage can be declared void if either of the two persons is physically impotent.
Public use of white canes by other than blind persons prohibited.
Fights between cats and dogs are prohibited. (Barber)
It is a misdemeanor to urinate or defecate publicly. (Chapel Hill)
Women must have their bodies covered by at least 16 yards of cloth at all times. (Charlotte) [Yeah! Bring back the bustle!]
It is illegal to drive cars through city cemeteries for pleasure. (Dunn)
No one may visit their departed loved ones late at night. (Dunn)
It is illegal to throw rocks at a city street. (Dunn)
No person shall spit on a city street. (Dunn)
You must stop and call City Hall before entering town in an automobile. This is so the townspeople will have time to go out and hold their horses until you get through town. (Forest City)
Restaurants "with on sidewalk dining" must post their menu so that it is clearly readable from the sidewalk, but is not readable from the street. (Greensboro)
You may not ride a bicycle without having both your hands on the handle bars. (Kill Devil Hills)
It is required that you must pay a property tax on your dog. (Rocky Mount)
It is against the law to rollerblade on a state highway. (Southern Shores)
It is illegal to stand outside the police station for any purpose after dark. (Zebulon)
 ;-D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
While some of these are rediculous, many date back to times when the infraction was relevant to the customary behavior and customs of the times in which they were enacted.
I lived in a town that bordered on another state and there was one such on the books in which "before crossing the state line in an automobile you must first use your horn for 3 minutes, then fire 3 flairs into the air at 3 minute intervals, then before proceeding, walk across the state line and make sure there were no horses in view.... then you could procede."
At the time when autos were new and horses pleantyful on the roads, while a bit extreeme, an ordanance such as this might have been founded in real as well as practical need.
The reason legislators leave these on the books is mostly because they have more pressing business than going through the motions of changing archaic laws.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Illegal for a man to give his sweetheart a box of candy weighing less than fifty pounds.
>Then he can take her to California and shoot her from a moving vehicle because she'll be like a whale.
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
>The reason legislators leave these on the books is mostly because they have more pressing business than going through the motions of changing archaic laws.
Yes, they are way too busy collecting lobby dollars, denying accountability and blaming the other party for bad government.;-D
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Well, some do good work.
Oh forget it....
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pipo
|
 |
Toe is in the water |
Registered: July 2008
Messages: 35
|
|
|
Reminds me of the famous (or infamous) Red Flag Act in England (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Flag_Act). According to wikipedia, the Locomotive Act 1865:
* Set speed limits of 4 mph (6 km/h) in the country and 2 mph (3 km/h) in towns.
* Stipulated that self-propelled vehicles should be accompanied by a crew of three: the driver, a stoker and a man with a red flag walking 60 yards (55 m) ahead of each vehicle. The man with a red flag or lantern enforced a walking pace, and warned horse riders and horse drawn traffic of the approach of a self propelled machine.
The stoker on British trains was not abolished until Margaret Thatcher's government (although of course the trains were long since electrified or diesel-powered  ).
But the state of Pennsylvania holds the candle in proposing the most ridiculous (or is that cattle-friendly) red flag law. In 1896 a law was passed through both houses that required all motorists, upon chance encounters with cattle or livestock to (1) immediately stop the vehicle, (2) "immediately and as rapidly as possible... disassemble the automobile," and (3) "conceal the various components out of sight, behind nearby bushes" until equestrian or livestock was sufficiently pacified. Sadly, the law was never enacted as the governor vetoed it (perhaps he was the proud owner of a "horseless carriage"  ).
By the way, that reminds me: here in Holland - a pool of sin, as you may know ;-D - prostitutes have to declare income tax and charge VAT over their services and it has been successfully argued that a criminal may enter the cost of a gun as business expenses on his tax declaration. And, as probably is well known, you may carry a few grams of marijuana for personal use but it is still illegal to buy, sell or grow the stuff (so-called coffee shops -nothing to do with actual coffee- are condoned)
[Updated on: Sat, 02 August 2008 19:01] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John..
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: March 2008
Messages: 56
|
|
|
ok
in the uk if you murder someone and you get life minus most of it so you do 5 years max.
in the us you do get a sentence.
our country is fucked up by do gooder priests and vicars, i watched a prog on myra hindley , what an evil person check her out, but do gooders tryed there best to release her, thank god she died.. sry about the spelling errors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear John,
There is no sense in punishing people just to be nasty to them for something bad they did.
It does them no good and makes you worse.
What the law ought to be trying to do is to make it less likely that crimes happen and, in particular, that a particular criminal doesn't repeat his crime.
If the people who are unlikely to repeat the crime were let out of prison then we could reduce the number of prison places to something in proportion to the rest of the civilised world and save a huge amount of money.
Maybe we could spend some of the money on better education so that fewer crimes are committed in the first place.
A country where 3 in every 10 children are brought up in poverty is unlikely ever to be free of criminals. Nor is a society in which it is respectable to be greedy and to pay some people a thousand times more than another.
Does anyone seriously think it can be right to pay one man a thousand times more than another? Is that fairness or justice and does it make for a harmonious and friendly society?
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John..
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: March 2008
Messages: 56
|
|
|
well your a fine example of the do gooder tpye in the uk.
If you break the law you go to prison, it is punihment.
do you really think you can heal a killer.
I worry for the safety of people in this country
[Sentence deleted by Moderator]
your family could be killed and raped would you let them repent.
Its like jobos, they would rather die than take a blood transfusion.
Get it str8, there are evil people, they cant be healed, they need to be exacuted like a dog if it attacks you put it down.
Why do we pussy foot about. send a clear message. i know lots of so called healed people that would cut your throat just like that. you worry the hell out of me with such a [word deleted by moderator] attitude to killers and the scum that roam the streets looking to rape and bugger our children.if i have offended you then wake up to the real world please .
[Updated on: Sun, 03 August 2008 10:53] by Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
I agree.....
Do away with the prisons....
I say bring back public corporal punishment....
Murder..... hang on city hall steps.
The stocks would be for other crimes..... of course displayed in front of schools and public buildings.
There's a deterent for you.... extreeme... YES... but effective.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Beware the thought police.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pipo
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: July 2008
Messages: 35
|
|
|
I think you are misreading Anthony. He is not suggesting that all prisoners should walk, but rather that protecting society from a criminal would be a better motive for imprisonment than punishment. You are contradicting yourself by the way if you say "it is punishment" and two sentences onward you say you "worry for the safety". If the motive of the sentence is punishment, it is not to keep you safe.
Of course the problem is than in who decides and how to decide if someone is likely to repeat his crime or not. In Holland we have a system called TBS (translated: to be held available to the government), that perhaps goes a bit in the direction of what Anthony proposes. Please bear with me while I explain (if you are interested in discussions of legal systems, that is ).
A person is sentenced to TBS if he committed a crime that in itself is punishable with at least 4 years of imprisonment, but he is deemed to be mentally ill or otherwise not accountable for his deed. In that case he is not imprisoned but instead locked up in a closed institution. In theory, that is so that it can be attempted to cure the person, but in practice the period of TBS often is longer than the normal prison sentence for the crime that was committed, and there is no maximum time. Usually a TBS-case must be re-evaluated every two years and will be extended for two years if the person is still seen to be a danger.
The average period of "treatment" is 6 years, but there are a total of 200 "long stay" cases - one guy was locked up in 1960 and is still being held today after 48 years, i.e., much longer than a "life sentence" in most countries. The total number of people held in this way is about 1,600 ( total population of Holland is 16 million, so it is about 0.01% of population). In comparison, there are about 14,000 "normal" prisoners, a little less than 0.1% of population.
Of course no system is perfect and the TBS system has regular problems as well. The critical period is when the patient is to be "re-socialized" and is sent on "trial leave". The first leaves are accompanied, but if there are no problems, there will be unaccompanied leaves after that (i.e., the person is free to roam around on his own). There are about 50,000 trial leaves per year and about 7 people per month run away during such a leave. On average, 4 people per year commit a crime while on trial leave, sometimes quite grizzly ones.
Imperfect as our legal system is, I must say that I do not feel less protected in my country than a citizen of the US (no, I never felt the need to own a gun and guns for "self protection" are not legal in Holland) or the UK (nope, I do not carry a knife either - not even a pocket knife  ).
[Updated on: Sun, 03 August 2008 16:02] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John..
|
|
Toe is in the water |
Registered: March 2008
Messages: 56
|
|
|
wow,
so many words. perhaps but i stand by my statement.
In the uk it is said put them in prison and they learn there craft.
OK perhaps they would think twice if it was an arab state, where they chop off a hand, and then put them in prison to rot.
That does send a message.
I am well aware that we are supposed to be educated people in the uk.
so you say hey you naughty person if you go to churh i will let you out of prison early.
Then also let them beat up old ladys and rape them.oh they are like that becaus they are poor give them a light sentence.
If some one hurt my family i would really kill them ,knowing that a kind person will let me out because im a nice guy. thats the message.
lol
:-/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in Giles v. California. The case presents the question whether the introduction of a murder victim’s prior police statement against a defendant on trial for her murder violates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The Confrontation Clause provides every criminal defendant with the right to be “confronted” with the witnesses against him, which includes the right to cross-examine them.
At Giles’s trial, the prosecutor offered the victim’s police statement as worthy of belief - as “hearsay,” in other words. The victim, because she is deceased, was not available for cross-examination. Was it proper for the trial judge to admit her statement to the police, even though the defendant could not expose its weaknesses through cross-examination? That is what the Court must decide.
writ.lp.findlaw.com/colb/20080528.html
The court decided to overrule the California ruling.
The state of California countered that, because his former girlfriend’s absence from the witness stand was a result of his murder of her, he forfeited his right to confront her. It made no difference why he had killed her, according to the state.
Amid a fervent verbal duel over English and American legal history, between Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the Court ruled Wednesday in Giles’ favor — at least temporarily. Scalia, writing for a 6-3 majority, said that the state had not shown that Giles had killed his wife explicitly to keep her from testifying, so his right of confrontation may have been violated by admitting, his former girlfriend’s earlier statement to the police. California had a law that allowed use of such statements any time the accused had caused the witness to be absent, whatever the reason (including murder).
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Giles_v._California
Oh Scalia where would The US be without you!!!!!
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the US supreme court ruled against the California law, it was not temporary, the law has been found unconstitutional. Giving it a lot of thought I can see where it would be. The 6th amendment gives a person the right to face his accuser and confront the witnesses against him. There is a reason for this. Befor the revelution you could be arrested and held prisioner and tried on the testimoney of witnesses you never saw and may not even have existed. The constitution gives you the right to be able to show that the witness was in error or was lying. This might let an evil man go free, but it may also keep dozens of honest men from being railroaded and falsly imprisioned.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yusime
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: United States
Registered: April 2008
Messages: 195
|
|
|
I still think its a bit odd, but I understand that. Good thing the Supreme Court allowed the ruling to be reviewed. Even if the way its worded is unsettling. The decision did not end the case completely. Without a review being allowed for the case it would have been 5-4 upholding the California law rather than a 6-3 decision overturning the decision.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake since for him a spinal cord would suffice. Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
And from the sovereign State of North Carolina... 
