Yes, I am familiar with the articles of confirmation appreciation society. Mike the cop has some amusing videos on the subject.Amateurs are quick to forget that the courts interpret the Constitution. An amateur's uninformed interpretation is wrong an amazing high percentage of the time. That reminds me, have you ever heard of Sovereign Citizens? They are a group that misinterprets the law and try to claim it does not apply to them. They then break the law and video it and quite often upload it to YouTube. Hilarity ensues.
He and others. Sovereign Citizen Bingo can be a real hoot.Yes, I am familiar with the articles of confirmation appreciation society. Mike the cop has some amusing videos on the subject.
Investigation of individuals does not equal punishment as a result of presumption of guilt.
"Although the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The case of Coffin v. United States (1895) established the presumption of innocence of persons accused of crimes. See also In re Winship." (source)
Then you will have to get some folks "with standing" to file a lawsuit that will work its way up to the Supreme Court. Otherwise it's just something you don't agree with.That may be how it's practiced, but I'm suggesting it's unconstitutional.
You dodge the question, not surprisingly.I sacrifice no one by allowing everyone the freedom to experience the effects of the causes that they make.
We cannot and should not prosecute possibilities.
Do you eat pork? Because if you do, you have no right to be quoting Leviticus to people.
Yes. Found "infected" by a jury of your peers.....guilt presumed (infected)....
Facebook offers a lot for sale as well today. It is amazing how many people do not know that what they have is not solid wood. I have seen pieces that I was tempted to buy even though my house is too full of furniture. Plain sawn oak is fine, for flooring it is not the prettiest wood on its own. My furniture tends to be most maple with a bit of pine, cherry, oak, and ash. I am sure there is some birch in there too. I have one table top that is red oak with a faux quartersawn top. The top is constructed of boards with a 1 inch height and width that were oriented so that it looks as if it were quartersawn.
If you buy something if you know the manufacturer you can sometimes look up and see what woods they worked in. Pieces called "maple" are often birch. Especially chairs since it steam bends far better than maple does. The same applies to many "oak" chairs. They are quite often ash, especially when made in New England. Ash steam beds much more easily and though open grained it is not nearly as clunky as red oak. Many people are unfamiliar with white ash, just remember, it is the traditional wood for baseball bats. Hard rock maple is a recent innovation in bat material. One can turn far more delicate spindles out of white ash than out of red oak. Some woods scream "veneer" which would be on mdf if it is from the 1950's or later. Pecan for example. It is more of a southern wood and the plants in the south tended to do more veneer work. Veneers allow more creativity, but I am not a fan of medium density fiberboard. No one tends to veneer on solid wood these days. You can find antiques that were done that way. But nothing close to be new is made that way any longer. Lastly for most people "cherry" is a color and not a wood. Cherry is usually stained because natural cherry will darken a bit on its own. And if one has something on it that blocks light that part will not darken. One has to be aware of that.
Investigation of individuals does not equal punishment as a result of presumption of guilt.
"Although the Constitution of the United States does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The case of Coffin v. United States (1895) established the presumption of innocence of persons accused of crimes. See also In re Winship." (source)
Again, the standard is "proven beyond a reasonable doubt". And what is reasonable is determined by society as a whole. Saying that you yourself are not convinced is immaterial when it comes to proving guilt.The foundation of the united States republic is based on innocence until guilt is proven, rather than guilt presumed (infected) before proving innocence (health).
I do not understand your slavish devotion to the Constitution.
Yes, is is indeed the structure upon which hangs our entire government...but if it is too rigid to withstand a pandemic or three, then maybe it’s not he be-all and end-all that you seem to think it is?
If there is no presumption of guilt, then exists no presumption of illness either.
"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
What I'm speaking about has nothing to do with killing others, but what Constitutional law says.
I had you pegged as a turkey bacon guy...Good Lord No! Pork is disgusting. Now Bacon on the other hand…
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?