but, again

they get a lot more into it with the theory

whereas METs primarily focus on labs and application

In truth, if I wanted to cuck to the BAR, I could become an attorney and make lots of money, but it'd kill my soul.

that being said, they aren't even necessarily better than MEs are at even application in the end

yeah, that is one of the main reasons I went for the EIT then the PE; to account for that ambiguity outside the area where they knew our school

because it is always better to learn the groundwork and theory, as that helps you learn the application a lot more easily once you do

well, it's BEST to learn both AT ONCE

true

Guys

Fellas

that's why i liked our program; we had to design from scratch, simulate, build, test

Gurls

I just learned something amazing.

sheilas

soup to nuts

The British are actually the real Jews https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism

Oof.

Technically, that's correct:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration##targetText=The%20Balfour%20Declaration%20was%20a,a%20small%20minority%20Jewish%20population.

there are many issues when attorneys that mainly deal in civil law try their hand in criminal law

@Marushia Dark can I drag someone out of my property for trespassing

cuz I feel like the law around that is ambiguous

mainly, in criminal law the state lets the husband testify as if he owned his wife's property

I've gotten different responses

doesn't work like that in civil law

But yeah, MA, going back to our earlier conversation, if you wanna know the law, it's this simple and this hard: "Do no harm." Everything else stems from that. What is harm, exactly? Well, that's what you have philosophy and ethics for.

from what I understand, even security guards have to call a real cop to actually drag someone out

> mainly, in criminal law the state lets the husband testify as if he owned his wife's property

Yes and there's a reason for that. Marriage is a property contract. A corporate merger.

you are trying to apply a 'head in the clouds theory' to real life practice; morals and ethics rarely enter into it

just generalize it to property contracts in general honestly

is it legal or is it not?

Legal and lawful are two different things

correct

and morality isn't a function of the state

Agreed

https://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/LegalEthics/LegalVLawful.htm

I'd still like an answer to my question

I don't waste my time in the weeds of legality when I can take the high ground of law and morality.

wait, your statement above contradicts mine

Coolitic, it depends. You have the right to tell them to leave, and if they refuse, you can use escalating force, but the law asks you to do the most reasonable course of action in pursuit of that

ok

then why do security guards

call cops

is CIVIL law, a husband, a man working for an LLC and his wife are SEPERATE entiites

this includes contract law

Cuz they aren't trained

bruh

they are NOT allowed to testify on behalf of each other in civil law

MA, I'm using corporation in a different sense than you are

they ARE in criminal

they should make citizen's arrests the 11th bill of rights

T-E-S-T-I-F-Y

not represent

"Husband and wife are considered one mind in law." ~ Legal maxim

but that doesn't apply in contract law

they are seprate and distinct

that only applies in criminal law

If Coke buys Pepsi and they have a corporate merger, can Pepsi testify against Coke? That's like testifying against yourself. That is why they can't, cuz you can't force someone to self-incriminate

you aren't hearing me

listen to what i said; your example is inverted. in criminal law, the state treats certain parties as the SAME person

@Coolitic They CAN, but do they want the risk and the liability is the question. Most of the legal realm deals with liability.

in civil law this is NOT the case

also

duty to retreat

Is there a question in there, MA?

is the gayest concept on the planet

Duty to retreat is bullshit. Stand your ground should be universal law of the land

how does your coke and pepsi example apply?

"A man's home is his castle." ~ Legal Maxim

Maxim is a men's magazine

not a legal magazine

😉

```
Stand Your Ground: No duty to retreat from the situation before resorting to deadly force; not limited to your home, place of work, etc.
Castle Doctrine: No duty to retreat before using deadly force if you are in your home or yard (some states include place of work and occupied vehicles).
Duty to Retreat: Duty to retreat from a threatening situation if you can do so with complete safety.
```

yeah, that kinda leaves one open to become an unintended baliee though

if they set up the scene beforehand by throwing something on your property and you have no clue it is theirs.....

It's an analogy, MA. The man is like Coke and the woman is like Pepsi. For legal purposes, you are considered a "person," in this case a "natural person." A person is just a legal construct. To wit: a corporation sole, which the law views as having certain rights. What we commonly call corporations, trusts, companies, etc. are called "artificial persons," "legal persons," or "juristic persons."

When you get married, these two natural persons, these two corporations, merge to become one legal entity. One mind. It's presumed they do so voluntarily and agree on all the consequences and act as one unit. This is why spousal privilege is recognized, cuz again, you can't force someone to testify against themselves (they have to do so voluntarily).

In civil law, there is no incrimination. It's just dealing with torts and contracts, so a spouse is just like any other witness.

I have caught a queen waspp

This is the same reason "corporate personhood" is a thing

again, ANSWER the question i asked

not the question YOU wish

you didn't even address it; just added more details

Maybe I can has a wasp nest as a pet

all of that which you stated i understand and agree with

if corporations are people, they be hella psychopathic people

but in a CRIMINAL case, the husband can testify as the owner of what was stolen even if the wife or business was teh actual owner

>> oh you have cancer and need insurance money? The best we can do is one dollar

this is NOT so under contract l aw

"A maxim is so called because its dignity is chiefest, and its authority most certain, and because universally approved of all. All law has either been derived from the consent of the people, established by necessity, confirmed by custom, or of Divine Providence"

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/maxims.html

Maxims are like axioms of math or amino acids in biology. They're the self-evident building blocks of law.

Again, you can understand the law by studying moral philosophy

yes, yes; twas joke

MA is upset because he can't legally divorce his wife

w/o losing a shitton of money

no, i am trying to get him to explain something i experienced in real life

with a certain criminal

who is now in a federal prison

you mean the scam artist your wife got tricked by?

yup

"To one consenting, no injury is done."

Contract law supercedes all other law, except in the case of immoral consideration. Again, I can't contract to murder a third party. This is why lovemaking isn't rape and BDSM isn't assault and battery.

and who is the main reason as to why you want to divorce your wife?

criminal law has different standards and rules from civil law

MA, it would depend on the specifics of the case. There are always exceptions to every rule, I'm just explaining the theory behind the procedure

Did the scam involve a good dicking?<:thunk:462282216467333140>

the man in question and his shaddy attorney used thos edifferences in his schemse

in a criminal proceeding, the state doesn't CARE about distinctions

Shaddy = shady x shoddy

yip

Explain to me what went on in this case.

brb

the guys ploy was to make some unsuspecting property owner an unintended bailee

he'd dump equipment at a property under the guise of doing work as a subcontractor of a 3rd party; then he'd leave it there and file a theft claim

he'd wait until insurance investigation then have another one of his shell companies go get the equip and after 6 mo, apply for a new title with another shelll company and sell it for profit

when i demanded to see paperwork of ownership, not knowing who or why equip was on my property, he obsecured his identity behind his wife in order to attempt to extort money

https://twitter.com/WarrensMemeTeam/status/1190884401061781504

https://tenor.com/view/cringe-brie-larson-confused-gif-13669431

How did he obscure his identity behind his wife?

if someone comes onto your property and starts something, you never saw him before but you call the cops to have he removed for trespassing

Was the property in her name?

the cop doesn't know who owned the property. neither did i

but he circumvented the cop and went straight to the da

Sounds like the DA didn't do his due dilligence, but continue

regardless if i KNEW that equipment was his wifes, it didn't matter; he has a legal right to be on my property

absolutely

DA is primary culprit

Dear god why can't the warren camp just die a quiet death.

@SageTheory Cuz you touch yourself at night

but this guy used the criminal system in order to prevent me from taking civil action

more importantly, prevent me from exposing his scam

Well, if he's claiming theft, that IS a criminal action, but he should have gone to the cops, not the DA, and the DA should have checked with the cops, since he would know he'd have to go through motions and discovery

he did; the cops were on MY side

the cheif of police was beside himself when it happend

Btw, your civil action IS a separate issue from his criminal complaint, but go on

it was even worse than that; in order to try to extort money from me, he had his wife hire an attorney using her madien name and issue me a letter

Did you tell her to fuck off?

trying to get me to do something in returning the equipment left on my property, documenting a good faith action while the husband out of left field made threats

using that ploy, he can act as either owner or innocent third party depending on what the victim of the ploy tries to do

So burden of prove lies with the accuser. What evidence did he have that it was stolen? Possession is 9/10s of the law, but the other is choses in action. So you said he had a reason to be on your property with equipment and I assume you had a written contract with him. The equipment was still there and he apparently knew it was, so the most reasonable course of action would be to tell him go get his stuff and you two break your contract. I'd be asking him tons of questions.

forged paperwork

How do you know it was forged?

and the fact that i made a demand in front of the cops to know who the owner was

Because a month after the case against me was FINALLY thrown out (18 months later) the same shell companies were part of a 10 count FBI indictment

Perfect, stowed away just as god intended

the paperwork showed him renting it from his wife using two of his OWN companies and her maiden name. i didn't suspect it nor did the court.

I really like this "russia simulator" game

As they say "In Russia there are no roads, only directions"

Some people call me the space cowboy.

Some call me the gangster of love.

by the way, this motherfucker was CLEVER @Marushia Dark

And your dog's name is "Ein"

when he found out the FBI was after him, he fled to texas where he promptly turned himself in. He said he was broke, had no job , spent all the money and asked for a public defender.

> part of a 10 count FBI indictment

Damn

Anyways, I'm glad you won, MA

But that was all kinds of red flags

meanwhile, the FBI finds 7 of his some 52 businesses that i found, concludes he has no money and then the FBI gives plea deal

why did he flea to texas?

Because he KNEW that most lawyers wouldn't BOTHER to check the Texas court records to examine the signed financial avvidavit

@Marushia Dark, i didn't really win; took 18 months to get them to even look at the crim case which they promptly threw out when they did. then he premtively took civil action

If it was dismissed, you won

given there was no crime and my wife hired him and made all the arrangement

I knew a drug addict that had 23 companies signed in his name

Anyways, what does this have to do with the wife? I would have been like, "Bitch, I don't have a contract with you. Show me the contract where your and my names are on it." Was it a joint holding between them?

Dude disappeared one day

you don't understand

we didn't KNOW he existed

my wife hired another guy

most of those companies turned out to be scams and he was a useful idiot to put the name on the paper

ok

that guy then made it look like the criminal worked for him

Him being a drug addict I would not rule out him just ODing somewhere unbeknown

so the police and even me have no clue who to contact when the guy hired says, 'it's not mine"

Can't know with these people

All I can say is thank god for presumption of innocence

ikr

he is in prison at least; small concilation

i was able to beat him pro-se though in civil court; he had to appeal it which is what i expected; i just wanted him to show his hand beforehand

boy, was his attorney sore. Those that argue pro-se have a fool for a client and to be an ACTUAL attorney and get beaten by some fool...

must have stung his ego

indeed

the reason they say that, though, if it's not out of self-interest, is cuz you don't wanna be emotional and defensive. You need cooler heads who are objective to prevent you from saying stupid shit

Question: Is it okay to be white?

oh definately

No, macka. It isn't. You should feel ashamed. Kill yourself. <:DrinkBleach:590859953225334794>

just the rules of evidence alone or some point of procedure can easily cost you a case say nothing for the emotional and bias element

yep

But take consolation in the fact that the law is a precise endeavor and those rules all serve a useful purpose

i only used the tactic because i was pressed for cash at the time, i knew he was going to prison soon and i wanted him to think i had nothing

I'll be honest, I'm not the greatest at courtroom procedure

One that I do know, however, is Rule 12 of the FRCP. What used to be called Demurrer

Very useful

ah, yeah that one was useful

the local rules were more of a pain in the ass; i think that's why he chose that area to run his scams

thanks @Marushia Dark i knew i'd get an intelligent answer

The procedures are opaque if you don't speak legalize, but judges will usually go easy on you as a pro-se litigant specifically cuz you're not trained. Honestly, in some cases, you're better off just operating the way you think the justice system OUGHT to work and let them worry about how to parse it into the rules. The only real exception to this is jurisdiction and capacity, which most people don't know about and that's where they get fucked is they presume they're supposed to be there and that the charges apply to them

i was appauled that courts in the same state, even adjacent counties could be so radically different

@macka

> i was appauled that courts in the same state, even adjacent counties could be so radically different

Yep

that's a weird card

yeah, i can see lack of standing throwing people as well

but it was also an education; i couldn't figure out why he premptively sued me at the time but then i realized once he made it a civil case t hat looked like a breach of contract, it made counter-suing for tort almost impossible

Legalese exists because the law must be precise, the same way engineering jargon exists. The problem is, it sounds like English but means very different things, even with simple words you think you understand. That's where people get fucked and it's that part I try to help people grasp

https://twitter.com/CURIEUXQUEEN/status/1190812936781983745

oh that is most certainly true. i always get annoyed when people don't recognize that every utterance can and will be interpreted at least 3 ways you never considered

The biggest issue is one I touched on earlier - the difference between legal and lawful. Most people think that just cuz a law is on the books it applies to them

nope; anti-trust for example

And this is why the justice system doesn't seem to work the way you think it should

customers are NOT competitors; you don't have standing

well, that is part of it

the other part are the changes made during Obama

ARD

For me personally, I have a certain vengeance towards the traffic code, since I got fucked by them for not knowing what I was doing.

Or rather, I knew what I was doing, but didn't stand up for myself on what I knew

ARD was supposed to save the courts money by avoind expensive trials but in reality, it just opened the door to victim culture

3x i was given the choice to pay he 4k or goto trial; i refused to pay him

but the prep for the trial was MORE expensive

I enjoy legal dramas. One of my favorite lines comes from the show "Fairly Legal," which says: "We go to court because we can't solve our own problems."

even though the case was thrown out the day before

SO true

If people were better at dispute resolution, there'd hardly be a need for police, lawyers, and judges

that has always been my personal philosophy; the lawyer is only needed when people aren't willing to work on resolving a problem

there's a book I was reading a while ago

that was talking about the natural progression of things like legal systems

like how many stories have you heard of cops getting called into a school over something the teacher or the principal should have struck down?

yup

teachers used to be an extention of the parent's authority

they were elders in the same community

and the teacher was almost always right no matter how 'unfair'

That in small societies, things like property rights were defended by you and your kin, but as things like blood feuds spun out of control and society grew

now, the kid is almost always right

There's a meme to that effect, which shows parents called into a school before a teacher. In the first image, the teacher looks snobbish and the child guilty, in the latter, it's the reverse, showing how things used to be versus how they are now

it was decided that disputes should be settled by those not involved in the situation

Guys watch this dude

duuuude

Watch till the end

DUUUUDE

NICE

LOOK AT THIS DOG

pog

mr red

https://tenor.com/view/shiba-heart-love-cute-dog-gif-12144452

hey

how are things

sup;; better than yesterday

not as good as tomorrow 😉

meh, mondays are not so great, just nice to get out really

i mean like seriously; i waited all morning to get car inspected and just when they said they had an opening; dead battery

be productive