#the amount of times i trespassed private restricted property | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

max1461 · 1 year ago

Text

I will reiterate again my views on private property, for those who have not heard them:

Property is a legal construct, by which an individual is recognized by the state as having essentially unilateral authority over some bundle of resources, and whereby this control is enforced by the state at the behest of the individual using the state's monopoly on violence.

Right-libertarians view the right to private property as a fundamental individual liberty that must be respected any just state, akin to freedom of speech. However, I believe this view is incorrect. At the most basic level, the difference is that freedom of speech puts restrictions on what the state may do—it may not arrest us for what we say. On the other hand, the "right to property" demands an enormous amount of active interference by the state in everyday life—to decide who is the legitimate owner of what, and thereby who may use what and step where, what is trespassing or copyright infringement and what is not. It demands that if you use the wrong resources in the wrong way, resources not recognized as yours, you must be jailed. It demands a constant management by the state of exactly who is using what where. Far from being the actions of a "small government", a pervasive system of private property is a status quo that can only be maintained by an extraordinarily large and everywhere-reaching government.

This difference needn't mean that private property is bad. In fact, I don't think it is in general bad! But I also don't think it is in general good, or in general conducive to the ideal of individual liberty and autonomy.

In our present society, private property serves a variety of social functions that I think are very positive. For instance, private ownership (or something basically akin to private ownership) of one's home provides them with certain guarantees of privacy and autonomy within their own living space that I think are vital in any free society. At the same time, when a home's resident is not its owner, as in the case where a home is owned by a landlord, the right to property is instead an obstacle to these basic individual liberties.

Furthermore, I think that owning a very large amount of property makes one a kind of de facto autocrat, backed by state force in the exercise of their own private whims. As goes the old quip: who has more control over your life, the president, or your boss? And which one is democratically elected?

The truth is that we almost all spend the majority of our waking lives within the workplace, a domain ruled autocratically by an unelected, unaccountable authority. Yes, we each have the meager freedom to choose which autocratic authority to submit to, or to submit to none and starve on the street. But this is not freedom in any sane sense. And I think the notion that we live in a free society when the majority of most of our lives are spent in submission to the arbitrary whims of state backed authority is ridiculous.

Does this mean that I think private property should be replaced with nothing? That all rivalrous resources should be allocated by first-come first-serve, or according to who can guard them by exercise of the most individual force? No, of course not! Rather, I merely think property as it exists today is something of an arbitrary system, an accretion of history, steered at every turn by the powerful to guard their own interests. I would like to see a wholesale reworking of the way that resources and their use are coordinated by society—this time, engineered from the ground up specifically to empower the greatest number of people with the greatest amount of personal autonomy. I think anyone who defends the present system of property against such efforts has no business calling themselves "libertarian".

This is no simple project, and though I have many ideas (which you can find by perusing my posts), I am almost certainly not equipped with the full set of skills necessary to envision an ideal system. This is a project which must be approached at the same time with a technical eye towards economic issues and a humanistic eye towards the broader effects of the new system on people and their wellbeing. I am, as always, interested in talking with anyone who can contribute towards a vision of better system.

#society

214 notes · View notes

curryalley · 6 years ago

Text

So Let’s Talk About Ross Comparing Thor To A Missing Weapon

He had to be doing something to try find Thor, right? All of that power uncontrolled and unpredictable. Who on Earth is there to ask for help when you’re looking for a missing god?

-------------- It wasn’t yet tourist season, which was why the string of black SUVs didn’t catch more attention. With no tourists for customers, most of the shops on the main street of the small town were closed. Many of the buildings looked newly built or remodeled, the painT still fresh. A sign in a shop window advertised Avengers merchandise sixty percent off. The banner stretched across the road was already bleached by the desert sun but text still legible in what was once bright red print.

WELCOME TO PUENTE ANTIGUA.

SEE WHERE THOR FIRST FELL TO EARTH

DESTROYER REENACTMENTS WEEKENDS AT 3

A snap from a local lingering over coffee and pie at Josie’s and the line of vehicles slipped down the street. The private property warnings around the old service station were only suggestions. One vanished under the wheels of the lead SUV as they crunched up the gravel drive.

There didn’t seem to be a doorbell and the walls of glass were covered by curtains, so the Secretary of State rapped on the glass to announce his presence. There was a wait. A long one. He knocked again.

The door was opened by a petite brunette wearing a pair of safety goggles on top of her head and a scowl.

“What?” she snapped. “You’re trespassing. You can take pictures in town if you - “ She stopped. “Oh. Secretary Ross. What are you doing here?”

“Here on business, Dr. Foster. May I come in?”

Jane stood aside so Ross and a pair of Secret Service agents in government issue suits could enter the lab. A portion of the refurbished station was living space but most of the wide open room was taken up by Jane’s lab. Some of the equipment was in various states of disassembly, trailing entrails of wires and circuit boards out over the workbench. Dirty coffee cups were mixed in the equipment, as if they been set down and forgotten when the drinker moved on to a project somewhere else. A soldering kit and large tool box sat to one side.

“Maybe we’d better sit down.” Ross set the open box of Frosted Mini-Wheats he’d picked up back down on the bench beside a display of monitors. He walked into the living area and sat on a side chair.

It was a bit like being called into the principal’s office in her own home, Jane thought. She shoved a throw blanket out of the way and took a seat on the sofa.

“Where’s Thor, Dr. Foster?”

Jane leaned forward, curtain of hair falling forward into her face. “You’re asking me? He’s probably back on Asgard. I don’t really know. We broke up. It was kind of…” her lips pursed, “...on the cover of US Weekly.” The exact issue was buried under a pile of mail somewhere. It featured a photo of Jane and Thor split by a bolt of lightning. The headline was THUNDERSTRUCK.

“We need to know. Thor only has so many connections on Earth. There are the Avengers, half of which haven’t seen him and the other half are fugitives from the law. And then there’s you. The reason Thor decided to interfere on Earth, if the stories are true.”

Jane straightened. “Excuse me, but what exactly are you implying?”

Ross waved a hand. “We need to know when he’s coming back. You’re probably the only person who can answer that.”

“If there’s an emergency, Heimdall is always watching. You can always try asking him to pass on a message. Might work,” Jane said. Not that she could picture the Secretary of State shouting into the sky for Heimdall.

“No emergency. Almost the opposite.”

“This is about the Accords, isn’t it?” When Ross didn’t immediately disagree, Jane pressed on. “You’re wasting your time. He won’t sign it.”

“And what makes you say that?”

“Really?” Jane tucked her hair behind her ears and stared at him. “You really think Thor is going to let someone tell him where and when to fight? He considers Earth to be under his protection. He’s not going to agree to having the same amount of responsibility as a pizza delivery guy.” Ross protested but Jane pressed on.

“How does that even work? Can he actually sign it as a member of a foreign monarchy? What about the religious question. He’s still worshipped as a god. Do you want to set a precedent for restricting a deity by contract?”

“Enough.” Ross stood. “Thor’s been involved with two alien attacks and his brother orchestrated a third. You should consider your place in all this, Doctor. You were involved in the first two attacks - one of which nearly destroyed this town - but somehow you’ve avoided any repercussions. Never even asked to testify before Congress. Now we need your help. Let us know when Thor returns.”

“Or what?”Jane snapped, getting to her feet. She stared across at Ross, shoulders back and feet apart. “You’ll arrest me for harboring an illegal alien?”

Ross smiled. “Funny. We’re just trying to keep the world safe. But no, we’re not going to arrest you. Your equipment, on the other hand…”

Jane stepped closer to her workbench, as if trying to get between it and the secretary. “What?”

“You’re trying to build a wormhole, right? A connection between two different points in space? Those are dangerous. We saw the effects in New York and in London. Who’s to say you’re not unlocking a door for an army to come through? Your research,” he waved a hand at the lab equipment, gaze landing on the open cereal box, “poses a threat to national security.”

“Too bad you don’t have the right to seize my private property. Now I think you and your g-men should leave.”

Ross nodded at the guards, who’d been standing quiet and inscrutable to the side of the room. “Fair enough. You might find I have the right to do a lot of things, though. Tell us where and when to find Thor and perhaps we can make an exception.”

“And perhaps the next time you want to drop by for a chat, you bring a warrant.” Jane shut the door hard behind them and flipped the locks.

“Heimdall,” she muttered. “If ever did want to pass along a message, now might be a good time to start. Things are getting complicated down here.”

#thor #jane foster #fosterson #thaddeus ross #thunderbolt ross #marvel #mcu #mcu fanfiction #post civil war

51 notes · View notes

libertariantaoist · 6 years ago

Link

Stated briefly, here are Mencken’s plan and Read’s rule:

Let people do whatever they please, so long as they do not invade the right and freedom of other persons to do the same.

Let anyone do anything he pleases, so long as it is peaceful.

Mencken’s plan and Read’s rule can be applied to a host of personal-freedom issues.

Drug use. Although marijuana is legal for medical use in 29 states and legal for recreational use in 8 states, and 21 states have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of it, those same states still heavily regulate it and the federal government still classifies it as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act, with a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. And of course, the buying, selling, and possession of “harder” drugs is still illegal on the federal and state levels.

Using drugs may be addictive, unhealthy, and dangerous, but it is not for the government to decide what risks Americans are allowed to take and what kinds of behaviors they are allowed to engage in. Therefore, there should be no laws, restrictions, or regulations of any kind regarding the buying, selling, or possessing of any drug for any reason. What a man desires to inhale or ingest into his own body is his own business as long as his actions are peaceful and he respects the rights of others.

The war on drugs is anything but peaceful, and is an invasion of personal freedom, privacy, and property. If someone is high on drugs and commits murder, rape, armed robbery, assault, battery, theft, shoplifting, or burglary, then he should be arrested and charged with murder, rape, armed robbery, assault, battery, theft, shoplifting, or burglary — just as he would be if he were high on alcohol; being high on drugs has nothing to do with it. And besides, it makes no sense for the government to wage war on illegal drugs, when tobacco, alcohol, and prescription drugs kill far more people every year.

Ticket scalping. Ticket scalpers are entrepreneurs who provide a needed service. They make it possible for events to sell tickets more quickly and efficiently right up to the day of the event. The exchange of tickets for cash between a willing buyer and a willing seller is a peaceful activity that should never be prohibited as long as the event does not violate the property rights of the owner of the ground where the exchange is made.

Prostitution. Every crime should have a tangible and identifiable victim with real harm and measurable damages. Prostitution may be immoral, sinful, and corrupting, but it is an illegitimate function of government to legislate morality. Activities that are peaceful, private, voluntary, and consensual should never be criminalized — no matter how immoral someone thinks they are. Those with moral objections to prostitution have the right to try to persuade women to not become prostitutes and men not to seek their services. They do not have the right to use the force of government to stop people from engaging in activities that do not involve coercion or violence. And besides, if it is legal for a woman to provide free sexual services as often as she wants and to as many people as she wants, then why should it be illegal for her to charge for performing the same services? Especially since someone’s indirectly paying for sex by paying for dinner and a movie is not a crime.

Gun ownership. Governments regulate guns more than anything else. Dealers cannot sell guns without having a license from the government. A gun cannot be legally purchased without the buyer’s having to undergo a background check and endure a waiting period. Only certain types of guns and ammunition are permitted to be sold. Yet, owning a gun is in and of itself a peaceful action. The vast majority of the millions of guns in the hands of Americans are never used to commit crimes. Although it has been said many times before, it is nevertheless still true: Guns don’t kill; people do. No one should be prohibited from buying, selling, or owning a gun. Those who use guns to threaten or harm people should, of course, be punished commensurately because they are violating someone’s personal or property rights.

Gambling. Casinos are illegal in most states. In states where they are legal they are heavily regulated. Most forms of public and private gambling are forbidden. Gambling may be wasteful, addictive, and ruinous, but it is not the job of government to prevent or discourage anyone from doing it. Anyone should be able to do with his own money as he sees fit, even if that means gambling it away. Those with moral objections to gambling have the right to try to persuade people not to gamble. They do not have the right to use the force of government to stop people from engaging in activities that do not involve force or fraud. Gambling is a personal and individual decision and none of anyone’s business as long as the gambler’s conduct and interactions are peaceful, voluntary, and consensual, and the gambling doesn’t violate the property rights of the owner of the ground where the bets are being placed.

Organ sales. Selling the organs in your body while you are alive (like a kidney) or after you are dead (most everything else) is currently a criminal action even though it is a peaceful, voluntary activity that violates no one else’s rights. But if you own your own body, then you certainly also own the organs in your body. Since anyone should be able to do what he wants with his own body as long as his activities are peaceful and he doesn’t violate the personal or property rights of anyone else, anyone should have the freedom to sell his organs.

Travel. In almost every city in the United States, a driver faces the possibility of being stopped by a sobriety checkpoint and checked by police searching for drivers who might be impaired owing to alcohol or drug use. In some states in the Southwest, drivers may encounter domestic immigration checkpoints miles from the border where government agents check the citizenship and immigration status of drivers who act suspicious, appear to be nervous, claim to be lost, or just have a thick accent. Americans who wish to travel to countries such as Cuba face numerous restrictions and prohibitions. No American should be prevented from traveling wherever and whenever he pleases as long as he is not trespassing and as long as he is traveling peacefully.

Occupational licensing. Depending on the state, many occupations (barbering, practicing law, et cetera) require a certificate of permission and approval from a government-sponsored board. But why should anyone have to get permission from the government to open a business, engage in commerce, work in certain occupations, have a particular vocation, or provide a service to willing customers? Performing a service — as long as it is requested, mutually beneficial, peaceful, and respectful of the personal and property rights of third parties — should never have to be licensed.

Government should never punish individuals or businesses for engaging in entirely peaceful, voluntary, and consensual actions that do not aggress against the person or property of others. Only violent criminals should be incarcerated, and no one should ever be arrested or fined for committing a victimless crime. That is true no matter how many people support the government’s doing such things. Mencken’s plan and Read’s rule are the foundation of a free society.

[Read More] (https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/menckens-plan-reads-rule/)

#laurence m vance #future of freedom foundation #h l mencken #leonard read #libertarianism

4 notes · View notes

your-dietician · 3 years ago

Text

Ammon Bundy seizes on housing shortage in new bid to take public lands in Idaho

New Post has been published on https://tattlepress.com/latest/ammon-bundy-seizes-on-housing-shortage-in-new-bid-to-take-public-lands-in-idaho/

Ammon Bundy seizes on housing shortage in new bid to take public lands in Idaho

Ammon Bundy, left, laughs with a supporter while grilling burgers at a campaign event on June 19 in Boise, Idaho. Known for his 41-day armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in 2016, Bundy announced his candidacy for Idaho governor in June. (Nathan Howard / Getty Images)

When Ammon Bundy announced his run for governor of Idaho during a recent barbecue, he cooked up quarter-pound “Bundy burgers” made from a cow that his father unlawfully grazed on federal lands, part of a rebellion that triggered an armed standoff with authorities in 2014.

The sizzling patties conveyed that Bundy, despite pursuing something so mainstream as running for office, remains the defiant anti-government militant who has earned folk-hero status with the far right. He’s still focused on radically reducing federal land ownership in the West, property that belongs to the U.S. public but is coveted by ranchers, farmers, developers and others.

“When you lose control of the land, you lose control of everything,” Bundy said standing on an outdoor stage between cardboard cutouts of Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, both of whom favored opening federal lands to development. “History and human nature demonstrate that if we build up and create dense and congested cities with large populations, traffic and pollution, we will lose our conservative, traditional values.”

Bundy is reframing the decades-long but narrow fight of his father, Cliven Bundy, against the Bureau of Land Management — the other BLM, as it’s known here — into a platform with broader appeal. He wants to use the governorship to wrest ownership of federal land for state control. It’s a campaign aimed at voters dreaming of wide open spaces and homes they can afford, wrapped in an idealized view of western life where land and resources are limited only by an unwillingness to use them.

Neither America nor the Gem State, he told the crowd, can survive the liberal creep of growing cities or the economic toll of too few houses for too many people. To “keep Idaho Idaho,” as his slogan promises, growth needs to happen out instead of up, as he puts it.

The federal government is “forcing everybody down into big cities and where they’re just surviving,” Bundy said in a recent interview with The Times. He spoke from his home outside Boise on five acres of apple orchards in an agricultural area known as Treasure Valley, surrounded by public lands.

Story continues

His is a message laced with undertones of violence, conspiracy theories and a concept of God (Bundy is a devout Mormon) that includes a belief in Manifest Destiny. In Bundy’s worldview, preservationists and regulators are enemies, and sneaky ones at that. “They infiltrate government … in order to force their ideological religious beliefs,” he said.

Environmentalists “don’t believe that God created the earth for man,” he said.

“They don’t believe, therefore, that man is anything more than another species that has evolved intellectually. And so they believe that it is their duty to create a disadvantage to humans, to balance the species,” he said.

Five years ago, Bundy led an armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon to protest the prosecution of two ranchers accused of setting fires on federal lands.

Two years before that, he helped lead hundreds of supporters in an armed confrontation in Nevada to stop a roundup of his father’s cattle, which ended with the government backing down (Bundy did not carry a weapon himself). Yet while Bundy faced federal prosecutions for both of these standoffs — and spent years in jail awaiting trials — he wasn’t convicted in either case.

“He fought the law and won,” said Devin Burghart, who tracks Bundy as executive director of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights.

Last week, that winning streak ended. Bundy was convicted by an Idaho jury on minor misdemeanor charges for trespassing and obstructing or resisting an officer, stemming from an August protest at the Idaho Capitol(which he is now banned from entering for a year).

Ammon Bundy, center, stands on the Idaho Capitol steps in Boise on Aug. 24, 2020, as part of a protest against COVID-19 health measures. (Keith Ridler / Associated Press)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Bundy capitalized on his government overreach argument and grew his base by leading multiple anti-lockdown and anti-mask protests, resulting in police arresting him five times, including the trespass incident related to his conviction.

His first court loss — for which he must pay a $750 fine and perform community service — is unlikely to hurt his run for governor, and may help it, said Boise State political science professor Ross Burkhart.

Some voters may be attracted to Bundy’s claims that “he is a victim of the state suppressing his right to free speech,” Burkhart said.

Rachel Goldwasser, a research analyst with the Southern Poverty Law Center, said Bundy’s sense of righteousness scares her.

“He’s not interested in what the masses want; he’s interested in what he believes is right,” Goldwasser said. “If he believes the thing he is opposing is unconstitutional, then lawlessness is acceptable. If it’s patriotic, lawlessness is acceptable.”

Across much of the rural West, tensions are escalating — and anger at government ratcheting to extremes — as the climate warms, fires rage, droughts worsen and population grows.

Bundy says that insurgency can be justified in places where federal rules hamper the use of natural resources, and preaches that the Constitution forbids the federal government to own many lands it claims. It’s a message that appeals beyond Idaho, especially for those in agriculture who fear their livelihoods are being regulated to death.

The election of President Biden means that opponents of federal environmental laws no longer have a friend in the White House and agencies such as the Department of the Interior. Biden has pledged to triple the amount of protected land in the U.S. by 2030 and enforce laws such as the Endangered Species Act.

In the western United States, ownership of land means access to water rights, and in no other part of the country is the federal government such a large landlord — or steward, depending on your point of view. In Nevada, 80% of the land is in federal control, as is 62% in Idaho, 52% in Oregon, 45% in California, and 29% in Washington.

Federal land practices also fueled the Sagebrush Rebellion of the 1970s that sought state control of public forests and range land. Reagan’s election gave the rebels some hope, but he and Interior Secretary James G. Watt were unable to significantly shift federal land ownership.

“You have always had anti-government extremists who have a fundamental belief that land should belong to them individually,” said Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, a Denver-based conservation organization. Weiss said that water rights have always been central to that brawl.

“You go all the way back to the first time you had white settlers invading the West, displacing Indigenous people, you will find fights over water,” Weiss said. “Because, at the end of the day, the West is dry.”

At the Oregon and California border, Bundy is in the thick of a dire struggle over water.

There, a group of activists aligned with him have threatened to forcibly take control of irrigation gates in Klamath Falls, Ore., where federal regulators have cut off annual water flows to family farms amid a drought that threatens endangered fish sacred to Native American tribes. The activists in Klamath Falls have erected a red and white circus tent, dubbed the Water Crisis Info Center, on private property just feet from the irrigation gates.

A display of the Klamath Bucket Brigade sits between a circus tent and a canal gate last month in Klamath Falls, Ore. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Bundy has pledged his support to the activists, one of whom, Dan Nielsen, stormed the Idaho Capitol with him last year. Bundy and Nielsen both confirmed they are in regular communication.

Recently, Nielsen said he is waiting to see if the water issue can be returned to state courts before taking action, but Bundy said withholding the water is “pure theft” and that if courts fail to back Nielsen, “I’ll go stand with him, and I know that there are thousands of people that will as well.”

The protesters are part of the People’s Rights Network, an organization that Bundy launched last year at the height of coronavirus restrictions. Using a proprietary internet platform, tens of thousands of members can communicate with one another, potentially summoning gun-toting supporters to scenes of protests.

Standing in his kitchen, Bundy recently used his smartphone to pull up the latest stats for People’s Rights — nearly 60,000 members organized in 29 states and Canada, all promising to protect their fellow members if called, he claimed. Bundy is quick to describe it as a linked network of “neighbors” who make independent choices and are not under his direction.

But Bundy does make calls to action, though often veiled. He recently posted a video on his YouTube channel, explaining how he sees America at this moment, using a mildew infecting his orchard as a metaphor. The fungus, he said, can’t be easily beat; the blighted branches have to be cut off and burned.

Without such drastic measures, Bundy warned, a nearby stand of saplings, with roots too young to fight the “invasive species” on their own, could die. The saplings, he said, were like “our children.”

Asked during an earlier phone interview who were the invasive species threatening future generations, Bundy said, “That’s a really good question. Maybe I don’t want to answer it.”

Then he continued, “Right now, I can say the agents in the Bureau of Reclamation in Klamath Falls, they’re certainly invasive species. They’re literally coming in, and they become parasites upon the people’s rights in that area.”

That kind of rhetoric has permeated the water crisis in Klamath Falls, and to some extremist trackers reveal a more disturbing picture of Bundy’s supporters.

In June, People’s Rights welcomed a guest speaker to the Klamath County Fairgrounds: a far-right activist who has claimed the proposed removal of four dams along the Klamath River is part of an “Agenda 21 method on how to control all people.”

Agenda 21 — a nonbinding 1992 United Nations resolution that encourages global sustainable development — has become fodder for conspiracy theorists who claim it is part of a plot to create one global government and trample freedoms in the name of environmentalism.

On a right-wing Telegram channel called Patriot Party California, an antisemitic message claimed the Klamath water shut-off was the work of so-called globalists who are “creating an artificial drought and an intentional food shortage.”

“Jews have made a move to starve Americans by cutting off the water supply to 1000’s of farms from Oregon to California,” the message read.

Goldwasser, with the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the Klamath Falls fight is playing out in an area that is “somewhat of a hotbed for white nationalism.” She said it has drawn the attention of militias and secessionists who support the creation of the State of Jefferson out of rural counties in Northern California and southern Oregon.

“Any time you have gun owners — open carriers whenever possible — that also have an anti-government mind-set to the point of anger and grievance, there’s always the possibility of violence,” she said.

Boise State political science assistant professor Charlie Hunt says Bundy’s shot at occupying the Idaho governor’s mansion is unlikely but not out of the question. Though the Idaho Republican Party has disavowed Bundy, ultra-conservative politics are the norm here, he said.

The lieutenant governor, considered Bundy’s main primary competition, is an ardent Trump supporter whom Hunt compares to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who supports conspiracy theories.

“It’s Idaho and there are plenty of voters who share those [far-right] views,” Hunt said. “The loudest voices in Idaho tend to be voices like Bundy.”

Burkhart, the political expert, points out that Bundy has name recognition and a fervent base. The tension in Idaho is less than in the Klamath basin, he said, but “if the exceptional drought spreads, then the political climate for Bundy becomes more favorable.”

Bundy, who supports himself and his six children largely from income from commercial investment properties, is taking the next year to run a grass-roots campaign, in which he’s promising to accept any invitation to speak that comes with a crowd of 50 people or more — including gatherings of urban liberals, whom he says he can convert to his way of thinking. His platform also includes an end to state income and property taxes.

Even detractors acknowledge he has a potent combination of everyman charm and cowboy swagger that still holds sway here, along with a clear framework of religious principles (including a promise to ban abortion) that win votes in this largely Christian state. Bundy said he believes his message will resonate even in the cities he scorns because the affordable housing crisis crosses party lines.

One of his daughters is 18 and thinking of marrying her sweetheart. She plans to train to be a masseuse and her boyfriend has college plans. Bundy wonders how they will ever afford a housing payment. His property, for which he paid nearly $600,000 six years ago, is now worth double that — a mortgage the young couple couldn’t manage, he said.

The average home price in Idaho is about $390,000, according to real estate tracker Zillow, an increase of nearly 28% from a year ago. Flooding the market is how he sees homes becoming attainable for future generations.

“It is important to know that the historical American dream was rooted in property ownership. In order for people to feel prosperous, secure and happy, they have to have their own home,” Bundy, wearing a trademark Stetson, told the cheering crowd at his kickoff event, which drew about 400 people, though organizers claimed 700.

“To create affordable housing for the young and the old alike, we simply need more supply. And to have more supply, we need to take our lands back.”

Chabria reported from Meridian and Klamath Falls and Branson-Potts from Los Angeles.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Source link

0 notes

tennesseeprelawland · 4 years ago

Text

Prince Harry And Meghan’s Struggle With The Media Continues In North America

By Abigail Morici, Rhodes College Class of 2021

August 5, 2020

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex made history this year when they stepped away from their royal duties. In a publicly released statement, they wrote about their plans to balance their time between the UK and North America in a way that would “enable us to raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter.” [1] The announcement came months after Prince Harry and Meghan revealed their struggles with invasions of privacy and the spread of false and malicious information by the British media. [1, 2] They have since taken legal action against tabloids and newspapers, including the Daily Mail, The Sun, the defunct News of the World, the Daily Mirror, and the Daily Express. [2, 3]

However, even after stepping down from the throne and moving to California, the couple still faces many of the same struggles with the press as they did in the UK. In fact, on July 23, they filed a lawsuit overpaparazzi photos of their son Archie. The parents allege that the photos were likely taken with a drone or telephoto lens, while they were in their backyard. If this holds true, the photos violate California’s anti-paparazzi law. [4] Indeed,California law states:

A person is liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters onto the land or into the airspace above the land of another person without permission or otherwise commits a trespass in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. [5]

The lawsuit lists the defendants as John Does since the couple is unsure of who took the photos. Their lawyer, Michael J. Kump, is seeking to subpoena people who know about the invasions of privacy. The lawsuit claims that media outlets and paparazzi have flown drones and helicopters above the couple’s house “as often as three times a day” to take photos of the family to sell and publish, and “others have even cut holes in the security fence itself to peer through it.” [4]

“The plaintiffs have done everything in their power to stay out of the limelight — except in connection with their work, which they freely admit is newsworthy,” the lawsuit said, according to The New York Times. “But the photos at issue are not news. They are not in the public interest. They are harassment.”The lawsuit continued, “Simply put, it is the plaintiffs’ choice when and how to share photos of their son.” [4]

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that members of the royal family have struggled against the media and privacy breaches. Princess Kate has also had her own legal battles with the media. In 2017, for instance, a French court awarded the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge damages over topless photos taken of Princess Kate. [6] Even more famously, Princess Diana died in 1997 after being involved in a high-speed car chase with paparazzi. Her death led to anti-paparazzi legislation in both England and America. These laws prohibited paparazzi “from trespassing on private property, using telephoto lenses to survey private property, or pursuing targets in cars.” [7]

In 2006, Californian legislature amended their anti-paparazzi law to allow victims of these types of privacy invasion to sue for “three times the amount of any general or special damages,” caused by these types of invasions of privacy. [10]In 2015, Californian Governor Jerry Brown signed a law that restricted the use of drones above someone’s private property. In an interview with NPR, Gregory McNeal, a Pepperdine Law School professor, explained the law further:

[A]erial images of someone in their backyard are traditionally not protected by any existing laws almost anywhere in the country. What this new bill says is if you get an aerial image of someone and you do it using a device - for example a drone - that image would be unlawful only if it violated the person's sort of expectation of privacy by invading their private, personal, intimate, familial activities and a reasonable person would be offended by it. [8]

Meghan and Harry referenced cited this law as grounds for their lawsuit. “Every individual and family member in California is guaranteed by law the right to privacy in their home,” their lawyer said. “It is one thing for parents to share photos of their children, on occasion, with supporters — particularly when doing so has the salutary effect of reducing the bounty on their children’s heads,” the lawsuit said. “It is something else entirely to cede all control to photographers driven by commercial incentive alone.” [4]

Many agree with these paparazzi restrictions, citing them as being a part of privacy rights. However, some have expressed concerns that the laws create tension with the First Amendment, which allows for photos taken in public places for editorial use.Of course, there are restrictions to this—for instance, one cannot take photos in public restrooms, even though they are in “public” places.[7] Still, people are concerned that if more restrictions continue to be placed on the paparazzi, this could in turn affect “the interest of a free press able to report legitimate news.” [7, 9]Regardless, so far, these laws have done little to stop paparazzi from breaking them—that’s why American tabloids and shows like TMZ still rely on paparazzi photos of celebrities. [7]

Meghan and Harry have yet to hold anyone accountable for the photos of their child, since their lawsuit is ongoing and their defendant is still unnamed. In the past, however, California courts have seemed to support celebrities protecting their children from paparazzi. In 2013, California legislature passed the “Halle Berry Law,” which prohibits paparazzi from “harassing” celebrities’ children. This law was met with some criticisms by people who fear that it violates the First Amendment by relying on vague language to dissuade “photographers form engaging in standard journalistic activities.” Such language includes “alarms,” “annoys,” “substantial emotional distress,” and “no legitimate purpose.” [9]

Whether Meghan and Harry have also cited the Halle Berry Law in their lawsuit is unclear, but Prince Harry has made it clear that he will do whatever it takes to protect his family. “Everything that [Princess Diana] went through, and what happened to her, is incredibly important every single day, and that is not me being paranoid, that is just me not wanting a repeat of the past,” he said. “I will always protect my family, and now I have a family to protect.” [2]

________________________________________________________________

[1] “In full: The Sussexes’ statement and the Buckingham Palace response.” BBC News, 8 January 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51041947.

[2] “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, says friends told her not to marry Prince Harry.” BBC News, 21 October 2019, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50119219.

[3] Landler, Mark. “Harry and Meghan Cut Off U.K. Tabloids.” The New York Times, 20 April 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/20/world/europe/harry-meghan-uk-tabloids.html?searchResultPosition=9.

[4] Vigdor, Neil. “Prince Harry and Meghan Sue Over Photos of Their Son, Archie.” The New York Times, 23 July 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/us/meghan-harry-paparazzi.html.

[5] Civil Code 1708.8, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1708.8.&lawCode=CIV.

[6] Willsher, Kim. “Court awards Duchess of Cambridge damages over topless photos.”The Guardian, 5 September 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/05/topless-photos-of-duchess-of-cambridge-were-invasion-of-privacy.

[7] “What are the Laws Regarding Paparazzi.” HG.org, https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-are-the-laws-regarding-paparazzi-31179.

[8] “California’s Paparazzi Have Had Their Wings Clipped A Bit.” NPR, 9 October 2015, https://www.npr.org/2015/10/09/447098701/california-s-paparazzi-have-had-their-wings-clipped-a-bit.

[9] Thomas, Andrew J., and Nary Kim. “Paparazzi law limits our First Amendment.” Los Angeles Daily Journal, 24 December 2013, https://jenner.com/system/assets/publications/12577/original/AJ_Nary_DJ.pdf?1388747495.

[10] Hudson, Jr., David L. “Paparazzi.” The First Amendment Encyclopedia, https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1249/paparazzi.

Photo Credit: Mark Jones

0 notes

yourhomesolutionsblog5518-blog · 5 years ago

Text

How To Pick The Correct Entrance Doorway For Your Own Home

The entrance doorway is essentially the most crucial entrance into your house. It’s the first thing your close friends will see, so it will need to have aesthetically pleasing possibilities. But It will likely be the Preliminary impediment would-be burglars or trespassers will come across, so it ought to be secure.

Your private home really really should be a haven in which you can Ordinarily attain convenience and relieve. But asides simplicity and comfort, your property must also make stability. In accordance with experts from Himmel’s, “…the entrance door is the 1st line of defence versus burglars. This is certainly surely why each doorway need to be able to providing best security in excessive of the entry it’s shielding…”

But due to the actuality every single house is exclusive, exactly the same kind of door will not be ideal for all configurations. That is without a doubt, the type of door that could suitable accommodate a household is based on which kind of acquiring It will probably be mounted in, In combination with the amount of stability and profit the operator would like. To make certain, you buy and have set in the proper entrance doorway for your own property, you just should inquire you the next problems.

What need to I buy a entrance doorway?

In each and every circumstance, price is often a working out part. If you can’t afford a selected items, there’s no placement craving it until eventually sooner or later you've got the fiscal ordinarily indicates to have it. Because of this, when discovering a entrance door, you'll want to Restrict you to the most beneficial top quality options inside of your worth wide range.

When retaining price tag within your head, ensure you Find the best great entrance doorway available. In the end, high-quality equals security and it'll be foolhardy to compromise top quality for charge. The standard of a doorway are likely to be based on The sort of lock it includes, the Vitality and toughness of The material employed to generate the door, And how incredibly properly its design and style blends together with your dwelling.

The size within your doorway you might need will Generally be based upon the dimensions from your entry you hope to include. The much larger the doorway, the greater costly it may possible be. Your selected doorway must also consist of a decent warranty. Specific doorway producers give all over ten yrs guarantee.

What type should I watch out for?

The entrance door style and design and style that’ll perform biggest for your individual household is according to your a number of household along with its place. A doorway’s model need to match the overall topic from the making and all of the position styles. Consequently, if the house is really an early Victorian a single, the entrance doorway’s model need to have Victorian areas.

The colour over the doorway is In addition a crucial component. You could settle for a generic colour that actually works whatever the colour on the generating’s paint. Or you could potentially choose a extra personalised colour that complements the overall colour system of your very own household.

What’s The best components for my front doorway?

Electricity is vital. But when you hope to have a small servicing front doorway that’ll consist of a lot less foreseeable potential hassles, you might Choose a composite style and design that’s been engineered to appear like genuine Picket. Other options include things such as metallic or aluminium.

But when you don’t object to executing marginally routine maintenance function once in a while, a robust timber doorway is a wonderful option which may be repainted when required to Improve its splendor Besides water resistant it.

Which protection measures should I Be careful for?

When purchasing a doorway, Be careful for one that initially comes with protection characteristics. There are actually secured doorway alternatives which have been analyzed for being resilient by Inserting them by intense safety checks which contain hitting them with crowbars, battering rams, and bags of sand.

The sort of locks that at the beginning include a door is A further issue you must continue to keep a watch out for. In case you be dissatisfied, it's possible you'll consistently update to the safer lock or even a wise just one certain. A quality door lock must be anti-drill, anti-decide, anti-snap and in addition anti-bump.

Which doorway improvements have to I concentrate to?

Smart doorways are an innovation that’s attaining daily recognition. The glimpse of these clever doorways have enhanced about new decades and grew to become far more liable and thriving. The two smart doorway features which are regularly remaining enhanced on will be the sensible lock and also the very good doorbell.

Good locks don’t intent by having an genuine essential. As an alternative, they use Bluetooth As well as other smartphone connections to work. Intelligent doorbells Conversely don’t just ring when any person is within the doorway, but have Superior to facial recognition and online video making contact with.

Fingerprint locks are Another up and coming innovation for Houses that’s slowly locating up steam. While obtaining every one of those ground breaking layouts place in on your own personal residence could possibly be a worthwhile investment decision selection, Take into account that any amazing lock you select on to setup on your personal dwelling should match the general look for of your residence. For example, a sizeable tech, futuristic lock on an out-of-date putting together might watch out of area.

What to retain away from?

The crucial matter to getting the suited doorway for your property is frequently to execute some preliminary investigation. Seriously know what your alternatives are as well as their Price tag ranges. Also, entirely grasp your developing so as to properly determine the kind of doorway which will perfect match your property. It's also probable to Look at with an experienced to guidebook you In case you are overcome by The assortment of possibilities on the market.

For greatest protection for your own personal household, you may even additional improve your entrance doorway’s protection by;

• Altering the deadbolt strike plate.

• Reinforcing the doorway and door jamb.

• Securing the doorway hinges When they're exposed.

• Organising conspicuous lights close to your entrance door.

Over time, exactly what is most vital would be that the doorway you select is usually a secure one that blends properly together with your home. This kind of doorway need to give you best security in Each individual specific affliction and ought to be easy to suit your needs Individually and each other inhabitant of your own residence to put into practice. Also bear in mind Simply because a specific door performs beautifully for one more household doesn’t always indicate it would be the proper door for yours.

youtube

#homeimprovement #homeglassanddoors

0 notes

johnhvollinspa39 · 4 years ago

Text

Heroic 6 Year Old Boy Saves Sister From Deadly Dog Bite

Picture courtesy of Niki Walker @nicolenoelwalker Dog Bite Attorney Phoenix Arizona Tucker Miller Law

The incredible story of Bridger, the heroic six-year-old boy from Wyoming who saved his sister from a dog attack earlier this month.

Amazingly this mini “Titan” is a Juijiteiro!! Bridger – is a student of jiu-jitsu – and his pediatrician told him he was the “bravest patient” they ever had. He intervened to save his sister from the dog attack because he stated: “If someone had to die, I thought it should be me.” Original Story here

Bridger, you are a real super hero and we at Tucker Miller Law are incredibly proud of and inspired by your bravery!!

Dog Attack Attorney Phoenix Arizona

What should I do after dog bite?

If a dog bites you, take these steps right away: Wash the wound. … Slow the bleeding with a clean cloth.Apply over-the counter antibiotic cream if you have it. Wrap the wound in a sterile bandage. Keep the wound bandaged and see your doctor. Change the bandage several times a day once your doctor has examined the wound.

What should I do if I get bit by a dog legally?

Steps to take after a dog bite Identify the dog and its owner. Immediately identify the owner of the dog or the person who had custody of the dog when it attacked you. … Seek medical care. … File a dog bite report. … Gather more information. … Photograph your injuries. … Contact an attorney. … Begin a journal.

Do I need to see a doctor after a dog bite?

Should you see a doctor for a dog bite? Yes. Although you can provide first aid for a dog bite at home, it’s important to see a doctor, especially if an unfamiliar dog bit you, the bite is deep, you can’t stop the bleeding, or there are any signs of infection (redness, swelling, warmth, pus).

What to do after being attacked by a dog?

The steps you should take after a dog attack are:

seek medical attention immediately

follow your doctor’s wound-cleaning orders,

report the incident to your local animal control

identify witnesses,

document the bite wound,

speak to a personal injury attorney at Tucker Miller Law 602-870-5511

Dog Attack Arizona Law Firm

What to do if your dog bites you and breaks the skin?

To care for the wound:

Stop the wound from bleeding by applying direct pressure with a clean, dry cloth. Wash the wound. … Apply an antibacterial ointment to the wound. … Put on a sterile bandage. If the bite is on the neck, head, face, hand, fingers, or feet, call your provider right away.

What food should not be taken after dog bite?

Some of the studies done in India have brought out a list of restriction followed by the victims which includes: not eating potatoes, milk, coriander, dhal, spicy foods, tomatoes, meat, etc.

How long do I have to sue for a dog bite?

One Year Is The Time Limits for Filing a Dog Bite Claim. If you are the victim of a dog bite, Arizona law requires you to take legal action against the dog’s owner within one year of the attack. This is referred to as the statute of limitations.

How long after a dog bite does infection set in?

After being bitten, most people who become ill will show symptoms within 3 to 5 days, but this can range anywhere from 1 to 14 days. Most Capnocytophaga infections usually occur with dog or cat bites. But some people who develop a Capnocytophaga infection have not been bitten.

Do all dog bites need antibiotics?

Most animal bites are from a dog, usually one known to the victim. … Antibiotic prophylaxis should be considered, especially if there is a high risk of infection, such as with cat bites, with puncture wounds, with wounds to the hand, and in persons who are immunosuppressed.

What does a dog bite infection look like?

The most common symptoms of infection from animal bites are redness, pain, swelling, and inflammation at the site of the bite. You should seek immediate medical treatment if any of these symptoms continue for more than 24 hours. Other symptoms of infection include pus or fluid oozing from the wound.

Why did my dog attack me for no reason?

Some medical conditions can cause dogs to become aggressive. If a dog that has never shown any sign of aggression suddenly begins growling, snapping, or biting, it may be caused by a disease or illness. … Your suddenly aggressive dog may have an injury or an illness that’s causing major discomfort and stress.

What happens if my dog bites me and draws blood?

Puncture Wounds The flow of blood out of the wound will help to cleanse it. After five minutes, see if you can stop the bleeding through direct pressure. Again, if it does not stop, call for emergency help. If it does stop, cleanse the wound by rinsing under running water with mild soap for five minutes.

Do you need a tetanus shot for a dog bite?

Vaccine considerations following a dog bite should include evaluation of need for tetanus prophylaxis. Dog bites generally are not considered to be tetanus prone unless they are contaminated with soil. … Tetanus toxoid should be administered to patients following a high-risk bite and without vaccination within 10 years.

Who Is Liable In A Dog Bite Injury Claim?

There could be multiple people or entities that may be liable for a dog bite. It is possible if the owner of the dog is not present, a caretaker for the dog may be jointly liable for injuries. There may be other instances where other entities or individuals may be held liable. It is important to consult with an experienced dog bite attorney to determine who the correct parties are in order to file a proper claim.

Under Arizona Law Would A Dog Owner Will Most Likely Be Held Liable?

In Arizona there are very limited situations where a dog owner may avoid liability. There are a few defenses to dog bite claims including baiting and trespassing. Baiting is when the injured person does something that a reasonable person would believe would provoke a dog. This can be something as simple as poking a dog or pulling its ears. The dog bite statute requires an injured person to be on public property or lawfully on private property when the injury occurs. Therefore, if an injured party was trespassing, the owner may not be held liable for the injuries.

How soon after dog bite do I need tetanus?

Even if you are able to clean up the wound yourself, you should still visit a doctor immediately after being bitten. Tetanus shots may need to be administered within 48 hours to be most effective.

How many injections are required for dog bite?

Start a course of 5 anti-rabies injections. Injections at 0 days, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days. Make sure you tell the hospital as much about the dog as you can,

Arizona Dog Attack Law Firm

How much is a dog bite claim worth?

State Average Cost per Claim Number of Claims Claim Payout

1 New York $59,789 821 $49.09

2 New Jersey $55,522 586 $32.54

3 Utah $45,760 116 $ 5.31

4 California $45,542 2166 $98.65

5 Arizona $44,522 393 $17.50

Ranking (highest) Information curated from Quote Wizard

The average settlement amount for a dog bite claim was around $32,000 in 2014, an amount that has only increased since. Oct 18, 2017

Does insurance pay for dog bite?

Insurance covers accidents and statutory liability If the incident is not an accident, but was intentional, only the victim’s insurance will provide coverage. Dog bites are 99.9% accidents, so both kinds of insurance are available if the dog owner and the victim have them. If you are a dog owner, consider bumping up your liability coverage to over $500,000 to ensure you’re financially covered in the event of a dog bite. Some would suggest purchasing an umbrella policy of one million dollars in coverage.

Can The State Of Arizona Take My Dog From Me?

Yes, depending if your dog is proven to be vicious without provocation. However, Arizona is the 20th state to completely do away with breed-specific legislation — laws that ban or otherwise regulate dogs by breed.

Dog Bite Lawyer Arizona

The American Veterinary Medical Association states that the rate of dog bites for children is highest between the ages of 5-9.

Most Dog Bites Occur with a Known Dog, in a Familiar Place

Most dog bites affecting young children occur during everyday activities and while interacting with familiar dogs (CDC).

The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim’s family or a friend (CDC).

80% of dog bites happen at home. (Kahn et al (2004) Miller and Howell (2007).

Can I lose my house if my dog bites someone?

Dog bites can be a serious problem. If a canine bit someone on your property, you may need to fight a lawsuit. Conversely, if you were bitten by a dog on someone else’s property, you may be able to recover damages from the property owner. Contact a local personal injury attorney to discuss your legal options.

If You Or A Loved One Have been bitten or Attacked By A Dog Give Us A Call Today 602-870-5511

DISCLAIMER: All statement contained are not meant to be medical or legal advice. Consult Your Physician if Bitten By A Dog

source https://tuckermillerlaw.com/heroic-6-year-old-boy-saves-sister-from-deadly-dog-bite/ from Tucker Miller Law Phoenix Litigation Lawyers https://tuckermillerlaw.blogspot.com/2020/07/heroic-6-year-old-boy-saves-sister-from.html

0 notes

apriljlynch29 · 4 years ago

Text

Heroic 6 Year Old Boy Saves Sister From Deadly Dog Bite

Picture courtesy of Niki Walker @nicolenoelwalker Dog Bite Attorney Phoenix Arizona Tucker Miller Law

The incredible story of Bridger, the heroic six-year-old boy from Wyoming who saved his sister from a dog attack earlier this month.

Bridger, you are a real super hero and we at Tucker Miller Law are incredibly proud of and inspired by your bravery!!

Dog Attack Attorney Phoenix Arizona

What should I do after dog bite?

What should I do if I get bit by a dog legally?

Do I need to see a doctor after a dog bite?

What to do after being attacked by a dog?

The steps you should take after a dog attack are:

seek medical attention immediately

follow your doctor’s wound-cleaning orders,

report the incident to your local animal control

identify witnesses,

document the bite wound,

speak to a personal injury attorney at Tucker Miller Law 602-870-5511

Dog Attack Arizona Law Firm

What to do if your dog bites you and breaks the skin?

To care for the wound:

What food should not be taken after dog bite?

Some of the studies done in India have brought out a list of restriction followed by the victims which includes: not eating potatoes, milk, coriander, dhal, spicy foods, tomatoes, meat, etc.

How long do I have to sue for a dog bite?

How long after a dog bite does infection set in?

Do all dog bites need antibiotics?

What does a dog bite infection look like?

Why did my dog attack me for no reason?

What happens if my dog bites me and draws blood?

Do you need a tetanus shot for a dog bite?

Who Is Liable In A Dog Bite Injury Claim?

Under Arizona Law Would A Dog Owner Will Most Likely Be Held Liable?

How soon after dog bite do I need tetanus?

Even if you are able to clean up the wound yourself, you should still visit a doctor immediately after being bitten. Tetanus shots may need to be administered within 48 hours to be most effective.

How many injections are required for dog bite?

Start a course of 5 anti-rabies injections. Injections at 0 days, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days. Make sure you tell the hospital as much about the dog as you can,

Arizona Dog Attack Law Firm

How much is a dog bite claim worth?

State Average Cost per Claim Number of Claims Claim Payout

1 New York $59,789 821 $49.09

2 New Jersey $55,522 586 $32.54

3 Utah $45,760 116 $ 5.31

4 California $45,542 2166 $98.65

5 Arizona $44,522 393 $17.50

Ranking (highest) Information curated from Quote Wizard

The average settlement amount for a dog bite claim was around $32,000 in 2014, an amount that has only increased since. Oct 18, 2017

Does insurance pay for dog bite?

Can The State Of Arizona Take My Dog From Me?

Dog Bite Lawyer Arizona

The American Veterinary Medical Association states that the rate of dog bites for children is highest between the ages of 5-9.

Most Dog Bites Occur with a Known Dog, in a Familiar Place

Most dog bites affecting young children occur during everyday activities and while interacting with familiar dogs (CDC).

The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim’s family or a friend (CDC).

80% of dog bites happen at home. (Kahn et al (2004) Miller and Howell (2007).

Can I lose my house if my dog bites someone?

If You Or A Loved One Have been bitten or Attacked By A Dog Give Us A Call Today 602-870-5511

DISCLAIMER: All statement contained are not meant to be medical or legal advice. Consult Your Physician if Bitten By A Dog

from Personal Injury Maricopa County AZ https://tuckermillerlaw.com/heroic-6-year-old-boy-saves-sister-from-deadly-dog-bite/ from Tucker Miller Law Phoenix Litigation Lawyers https://tuckermillerlaw.tumblr.com/post/624458434948038656

0 notes

rolandmbrown35 · 4 years ago

Text

Heroic 6 Year Old Boy Saves Sister From Deadly Dog Bite

Picture courtesy of Niki Walker @nicolenoelwalker Dog Bite Attorney Phoenix Arizona Tucker Miller Law

The incredible story of Bridger, the heroic six-year-old boy from Wyoming who saved his sister from a dog attack earlier this month.

Bridger, you are a real super hero and we at Tucker Miller Law are incredibly proud of and inspired by your bravery!!

Dog Attack Attorney Phoenix Arizona

What should I do after dog bite?

What should I do if I get bit by a dog legally?

Do I need to see a doctor after a dog bite?

What to do after being attacked by a dog?

The steps you should take after a dog attack are:

seek medical attention immediately

follow your doctor’s wound-cleaning orders,

report the incident to your local animal control

identify witnesses,

document the bite wound,

speak to a personal injury attorney at Tucker Miller Law 602-870-5511

Dog Attack Arizona Law Firm

What to do if your dog bites you and breaks the skin?

To care for the wound:

What food should not be taken after dog bite?

Some of the studies done in India have brought out a list of restriction followed by the victims which includes: not eating potatoes, milk, coriander, dhal, spicy foods, tomatoes, meat, etc.

How long do I have to sue for a dog bite?

How long after a dog bite does infection set in?

Do all dog bites need antibiotics?

What does a dog bite infection look like?

Why did my dog attack me for no reason?

What happens if my dog bites me and draws blood?

Do you need a tetanus shot for a dog bite?

Who Is Liable In A Dog Bite Injury Claim?

Under Arizona Law Would A Dog Owner Will Most Likely Be Held Liable?

How soon after dog bite do I need tetanus?

Even if you are able to clean up the wound yourself, you should still visit a doctor immediately after being bitten. Tetanus shots may need to be administered within 48 hours to be most effective.

How many injections are required for dog bite?

Start a course of 5 anti-rabies injections. Injections at 0 days, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days. Make sure you tell the hospital as much about the dog as you can,

Arizona Dog Attack Law Firm

How much is a dog bite claim worth?

State Average Cost per Claim Number of Claims Claim Payout

1 New York $59,789 821 $49.09

2 New Jersey $55,522 586 $32.54

3 Utah $45,760 116 $ 5.31

4 California $45,542 2166 $98.65

5 Arizona $44,522 393 $17.50

Ranking (highest) Information curated from Quote Wizard

The average settlement amount for a dog bite claim was around $32,000 in 2014, an amount that has only increased since. Oct 18, 2017

Does insurance pay for dog bite?

Can The State Of Arizona Take My Dog From Me?

Dog Bite Lawyer Arizona

The American Veterinary Medical Association states that the rate of dog bites for children is highest between the ages of 5-9.

Most Dog Bites Occur with a Known Dog, in a Familiar Place

Most dog bites affecting young children occur during everyday activities and while interacting with familiar dogs (CDC).

The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim’s family or a friend (CDC).

80% of dog bites happen at home. (Kahn et al (2004) Miller and Howell (2007).

Can I lose my house if my dog bites someone?

If You Or A Loved One Have been bitten or Attacked By A Dog Give Us A Call Today 602-870-5511

DISCLAIMER: All statement contained are not meant to be medical or legal advice. Consult Your Physician if Bitten By A Dog

from https://tuckermillerlaw.com/heroic-6-year-old-boy-saves-sister-from-deadly-dog-bite/

from Tucker Miller Law Phoenix Litigation Lawyers - Blog https://ift.tt/3fQozv0

0 notes

tuckermillerlaw · 4 years ago

Text

Heroic 6 Year Old Boy Saves Sister From Deadly Dog Bite

Picture courtesy of Niki Walker @nicolenoelwalker Dog Bite Attorney Phoenix Arizona Tucker Miller Law

The incredible story of Bridger, the heroic six-year-old boy from Wyoming who saved his sister from a dog attack earlier this month.

Bridger, you are a real super hero and we at Tucker Miller Law are incredibly proud of and inspired by your bravery!!

Dog Attack Attorney Phoenix Arizona

What should I do after dog bite?

What should I do if I get bit by a dog legally?

Do I need to see a doctor after a dog bite?

What to do after being attacked by a dog?

The steps you should take after a dog attack are:

seek medical attention immediately

follow your doctor’s wound-cleaning orders,

report the incident to your local animal control

identify witnesses,

document the bite wound,

speak to a personal injury attorney at Tucker Miller Law 602-870-5511

Dog Attack Arizona Law Firm

What to do if your dog bites you and breaks the skin?

To care for the wound:

What food should not be taken after dog bite?

Some of the studies done in India have brought out a list of restriction followed by the victims which includes: not eating potatoes, milk, coriander, dhal, spicy foods, tomatoes, meat, etc.

How long do I have to sue for a dog bite?

How long after a dog bite does infection set in?

Do all dog bites need antibiotics?

What does a dog bite infection look like?

Why did my dog attack me for no reason?

What happens if my dog bites me and draws blood?

Do you need a tetanus shot for a dog bite?

Who Is Liable In A Dog Bite Injury Claim?

Under Arizona Law Would A Dog Owner Will Most Likely Be Held Liable?

How soon after dog bite do I need tetanus?

Even if you are able to clean up the wound yourself, you should still visit a doctor immediately after being bitten. Tetanus shots may need to be administered within 48 hours to be most effective.

How many injections are required for dog bite?

Start a course of 5 anti-rabies injections. Injections at 0 days, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days. Make sure you tell the hospital as much about the dog as you can,

Arizona Dog Attack Law Firm

How much is a dog bite claim worth?

State Average Cost per Claim Number of Claims Claim Payout

1 New York $59,789 821 $49.09

2 New Jersey $55,522 586 $32.54

3 Utah $45,760 116 $ 5.31

4 California $45,542 2166 $98.65

5 Arizona $44,522 393 $17.50

Ranking (highest) Information curated from Quote Wizard

The average settlement amount for a dog bite claim was around $32,000 in 2014, an amount that has only increased since. Oct 18, 2017

Does insurance pay for dog bite?

Can The State Of Arizona Take My Dog From Me?

Dog Bite Lawyer Arizona

The American Veterinary Medical Association states that the rate of dog bites for children is highest between the ages of 5-9.

Most Dog Bites Occur with a Known Dog, in a Familiar Place

Most dog bites affecting young children occur during everyday activities and while interacting with familiar dogs (CDC).

The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim’s family or a friend (CDC).

80% of dog bites happen at home. (Kahn et al (2004) Miller and Howell (2007).

Can I lose my house if my dog bites someone?

If You Or A Loved One Have been bitten or Attacked By A Dog Give Us A Call Today 602-870-5511

DISCLAIMER: All statement contained are not meant to be medical or legal advice. Consult Your Physician if Bitten By A Dog

from Personal Injury Maricopa County AZ https://tuckermillerlaw.com/heroic-6-year-old-boy-saves-sister-from-deadly-dog-bite/

0 notes

scfop3 · 6 years ago

Photo

New Post has been published on https://scfop3.org/police-interaction-with-homeless-persons/

Police Interaction with Homeless Persons

Police Interaction with Homeless Persons: An Update on Recent Developments

Introduction

Begging, Solicitation, and the First Amendment

Camping Out and Living in Vehicles

Property and Pets

Feeding the Homeless

Use of Force

Liability for Crimes by the Homeless?

Resources and References

Introduction

Ten years ago, in the fall of 2008, this journal published two articles focusing on some significant case law on police interaction with homeless persons. See Police Interaction with Homeless Persons – Part I – Sleeping and Possessions, 2008 (7) AELE Mo. L.J. 101 and Police Interaction with Homeless Persons – Part II – Panhandling and Use of Force, 2008 (9) AELE Mo. L.J. 101. In the intervening decade, there have been a number of significant lawsuits asserting various claims on behalf of homeless persons.

In a number of such cases, various courts have sometimes taken an expansive view of the rights of such persons, entertaining some claims that may earlier have been dismissed out of hand. This brief article attempts to update the earlier two articles. Clearly, the social, economic, and law enforcement issues arising from homelessness continue to be challenging and unresolved. At the conclusion of this article, there is a listing of some useful and relevant resources and references.

Begging, Solicitation, and the First Amendment

While courts have generally upheld law enforcement efforts to curtail “aggressive” panhandling/begging, there have been a number of instances in which a uniform ban on all such solicitation has been viewed as potentially running afoul of the First Amendment.

An example of this is Speet v. Schuette, #12-2213, 726 F.3d 867 (6th Cir.2013), finding that a Michigan state anti-begging statute under which two homeless adults were arrested violated the First Amendment. The statute was facially invalid since begging was a form of solicitation protected by the First Amendment and the law prohibited a substantial amount of solicitation by beggars but allowed other solicitation based on its content.

One arrestee had been holding signs saying “Cold and Hungry, God Bless” and “Need Job, God Bless.” The second arrestee, a veteran who needed money for bus fare, asked another person on the street whether they could “spare a little change.” While there was a substantial state interest in preventing duress and fraud, the law was not narrowly tailored to serve those interests, the court concluded.

Similarly, in Reynolds v. Middleton, #13-2389, 779 F.3d 222 (4th Cir. 2015 ), a homeless man who supports himself by soliciting donations filed a federal lawsuit challenging a county ordinance prohibiting solicitations on county roadways. A federal appeals court found that the county had the burden of showing the constitutionality of the ordinance, which the plaintiff showed limited his ability to collect donations because he was forced to move to locations where it was more difficult for drivers to give him money.

The court further ruled that the county failed to show that the ordinance was content neutral and was a narrowly tailored time, place, and manner restriction on free speech, or that it left open ample alternative channels of communication. While the county showed that the ordinance materially advanced its interest in roadway safety, it failed to show that it had tried to improve safety by prosecuting those roadway solicitors who actually obstructed traffic or had thought about barring solicitations only at certain locations where it could not be done safely.

On the other hand, in Thayer v. City of Worcester, #13-2355, 755 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2014), a federal appeals court ruled that a trial court properly denied a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of most provisions of an ordinance aimed at

aggressive panhandlers, other solicitors, and demonstrators seeking the attention of motorists (other than a ban on nighttime solicitation). The ordinance was challenged by homeless people who solicited donations from city sidewalks and a person who displayed political signs near traffic during election campaigns.

The restrictions in the ordinance were not aimed at the content of speech, the court found, and did not appear to violate the First Amendment. And as homelessness and wealth were not suspect classifications for equal protection purposes, the ordinance would only have to survive rational basis scrutiny.

In The Contributor v. City of Brentwood, #12-6598, 726 F.3d 861 (6th Cir. 2013), First Amendment claims by homeless persons resulted in a modification of an ordinance restricting solicitation. The case was filed by a street newspaper devoted to educating people about homelessness, which used homeless people as street vendors. It challenged an ordinance that two of its vendors were cited for violating that barred using any part of the city street, alley, sidewalk, or public right of way to sell any goods or materials.

The city altered the ordinance so that it did not bar the sale or distribution of publications or handbills. Under the revised ordinance, those activities were prohibited, however, on any portion of the street. The revised ordinance also barred handing such materials to an occupant of a motor vehicle on the street or taking action reasonably intended to cause a vehicle occupant to hand anything to the person selling or distributing the materials. The federal appeals court upheld a determination that the ordinance, as revised, did not violate the First Amendment and left open adequate available alternative channels of communication.

Camping Out and Living in Vehicles

Where to sleep is a constant issue for homeless persons. A good number of prior cases upheld restrictions on camping out overnight on public property or sleeping on city sidewalks, as illustrated by Foley v. Kiely, #09-1250, 602 F.3d 28 (1st Cir.

2010). In this case, a homeless man claimed that he was unlawfully detained and arrested by two Massachusetts state troopers and a state police officer for trespassing in a public park after it closed at night. Upholding summary judgment for the defendants, a federal appeals court found that it was reasonable for them to suspect, at 10:30 p.m., that the plaintiff was in a restricted area and therefore trespassing, based on signs designating the closing time of the park.

Additionally, the area was known by the defendants to be one in which crimes had been reported, and the plaintiff’s attempts to avoid contact with the officers, combined with his inability or unwillingness to provide his Social Security number, gave the officers reasonable grounds to investigate his past criminal history. This reasonable suspicion justified his one-hour detention for a warrant check, and the Florida state warrant found was sufficient to give them probable cause for his arrest.

The case of Allen v. City of Sacramento, #C071710, 234 Cal.App.4th 41, 183 Cal.Rptr.3d 654, 2015 Cal. App. Lexis 116, however, involved the consented use of private property. The owner of this private property agreed to let 22 homeless persons and two persons providing services to them camp on his lot, located in a light industrial area of the city. Police then informed all concerned that the camping was in violation of a city ordinance that required a permit for extended camping on public or private property. Police removed camping gear from the site and issued two citations for an ordinance violation.

When the campers brought in more gear and continued their activities, they were arrested. An agreed judgment was entered against the plaintiffs’ challenge to the ordinance as unconstitutional, in order to facilitate an appeal. The federal appeals court found that the plaintiffs had stated a triable claim for declaratory relief challenging the ordinance as applied on the basis of equal protection. The plaintiffs forfeited, however, their claims for arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, violation of substantive due process, and impermissible vagueness.

Some homeless persons have attempted to live in a vehicle. In Desertrain v. City of Los Angeles, #11-56957, 754 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2014), a federal appeals court found that an ordinance prohibiting the use of a vehicle as living quarters was void for vagueness in violation of due process since it offered no guidance as to what conduct was prohibited and failed to clearly divide criminal and innocent conduct. As written, it could be broad enough to apply to any driver who transported personal belongings or ate in his vehicle, but it apparently was only applied to homeless persons, opening the door to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Summary judgment for the defendants was reversed and further proceedings were ordered.

Property and Pets

To the extent that homeless persons manage to acquire any possessions, retaining and safeguarding them is a difficult proposition. In Lavan v. City of Los Angeles,

#11-56253, 693 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2012), homeless persons sued a city, claiming that it violated their rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments by routinely seizing their unabandoned personal property temporarily left on public sidewalks and immediately destroying it. A federal appeals court upheld a preliminary injunction against these practices granted by the trial court.

The injunction required that unabandoned personal property seized could not be destroyed without giving the owners a prior meaningful notice and opportunity to be heard. The homeless persons’ property was protected from unlawful seizure by the Fourth Amendment and could not be destroyed without complying with due process requirements.

What about animals, including pets? In Recchia v. Los Angeles Dept. of Animal Services, #13-57002, 889 F.3d 553 (9th Cir. 2018), a homeless man was living on the streets of Los Angeles, and caring for 20 birds when animal control officers showed up at his tent to investigate complaints about the animals. Officers found 18 pigeons, a crow, and a seagull in boxes and cages in his home on a sidewalk, all in various states of health. The city decided to seize all of the animals, giving the man 10 days to request a hearing to regain custody.

But before that deadline was up, a city veterinarian euthanized all the pigeons, claiming they could’ve been carrying pathogens without ever testing their blood. The man sued the city, and his case was dismissed by a trial court. But a federal appeals court revived some his claims, saying his constitutional rights might’ve been violated.

It upheld a grant of summary judgment on the Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against the officers and dismissal of the state law claims, but vacated the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on the Fourth Amendment claim challenging the seizure of the birds because there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether plaintiff’s healthy-looking birds posed any meaningful risk to the other birds or humans at the time they were seized.

It further instructed the trial court to consider whether the officers were entitled to qualified immunity because any constitutional violation was not clearly established at the time it was committed.

Feeding the Homeless

A number of municipalities have taken actions designed to limit the public feeding of homeless persons on public property by charitable groups. In First Vagabonds Church of God v. City of Orlando, #08-16788, 638 F.3d 756 (11th Cir. 2011), a federal appeals court upheld the constitutionality of a municipal ordinance that limits the number of feedings of large groups that any person or organization can sponsor in parks within a two-mile radius of City Hall.

The court rejected the argument of an organization calling itself “Food Not Bombs” that it had a First Amendment right to feed large groups of homeless people in any park as often as it likes. The court found that the ordinance was a reasonable time, place, and manner regulation, assuming, for purposes of argument, without deciding, that such feedings were expressive activity.

Use of Force

The use of force, deadly and otherwise, by the police against homeless persons has led to a number of lawsuits. In Tchayou v. City of Los Angeles, #CV16-06073, (May 10, 2018, U.S. Dist Court, C.D. Calif.), the city of Los Angeles, California on May 10, 2018, reached a $1.9 million settlement with the plaintiff family in a federal lawsuit brought over the police shooting and killing of a homeless man. The shooting took place in 2015 and was viewed online by many in a YouTube video.

A jury in the federal lawsuit, just before the settlement, found that two officers were liable for the death of the 43-year-old decedent, Charley “Africa” Keunang. The jury found that the shooting officer used excessive force and that his supervising sergeant was also liable for failing to intervene. A third officer present was found not liable. The decedent was shot as he “scuffled” with the officers as they responded to a report of an attempted robbery outside of a rescue mission. The county district attorney’s office declined to charge the three officers, and in a 2016 report stated that they were justified in using lethal force because the homeless man had nearly gotten hold of an officer’s holstered gun as they fought. The decedent reportedly had a history of violent, erratic behavior, and had served time in prison for bank robbery.

See also Williams v. DeKalb County, #07-14367, 327 Fed. Appx. 156,2009 U.S. App. Lexis 9839 (Unpub. 11th Cir.), in which a homeless arrestee claimed that he was picked up by an officer for loitering, and then taken to a wooden area where the officer beat and stabbed him. A federal appeals court ruled that a claim by the arrestee that the county was liable for his injuries because it has an unwritten policy that homeless people should be relocated to other counties should have survived summary judgment because evidence was presented of five officers who allegedly knew of the policy.

Additionally, there was expert testimony that such a policy made violations of the rights of homeless persons foreseeable. A claim against the county for negligent hiring of the officer was rejected because the only violent act in the officer’s record was the shooting of a home invader. The appeals court also rejected a claim against the county for inadequate training or supervision.

There was evidence that revealed that the county investigated reports concerning the officer’s handling of arrests, provided the officer with counseling and retraining, and subjected him to discipline, which did not show “deliberate indifference” to a known problem.

Liability for Crimes by the Homeless?

What about potential liability for crimes committed by homeless persons? Ordinarily, under federal civil rights law, there is no liability on the part of police or other governmental actors for failure to prevent private violence by third parties.

Rare exceptions may be found where there is a “state created danger,” when arguably the government’s actions enhanced the danger to the injured party, or in which a “special relationship” was created imposing a duty to project, such as when explicit promises of assistance are made in a manner that is relied on and which may encourage those who receive such promises of assistance to stop seeking other assistance.

In Doe v City of New York, 2008-09461, 67 A.D.3d 8542009 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 8419 (2nd Dept.), a woman sued a transit authority and railroad, seeking damages for an attack she suffered on their property when she was attacked by a group of homeless men living there. The basis of her complaint was the failure of the defendants to remove the homeless encampment from the property, and the alleged failure to consider safety problems that could arise from their “homeless outreach” program.

Rejecting liability, an intermediate New York appellate court found that the defendants made a discretionary governmental policy decision in enacting a “social outreach” program rather than using force to oust the homeless group from the premises. As a result, there could be no liability under state law for the allegedly resulting attack.

See also Alava v. City of New York, #3807, 103339/04, 54 A.D.3d 565, 2008 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 6546 (A.D. 1st Dept.), in which an employee working for a private company providing data entry services for a city department of homeless services was allegedly assaulted by a person she was registering for services as a prospective client of a homeless shelter.

She sued the city, but an intermediate New York appeals court ruled that the city was entitled to summary judgment because it had not assumed any special duty to protect the employee, nor had the plaintiff shown that she had reasonably relied on any direct promise to provide her with such protection. While security officers who were usually outside the intake office were not present on the day of the incident, there was no evidence that they were ever in the intake office with the employee.

Resources

The following are some useful resources related to the subject of this article.

City of San Diego Homeless Outreach

City of Wichita Homeless Outreach

Fort Lauderdale Police Department Policy on Homeless Persons.

HOMELESS OUTREACH TEAM: ANOTHER WAY TO FIGHT CRIME Houston Police Department, Houston, Texas

Homeless Persons. AELE Civil Case

Homelessness: Litigation and Policy: Civil Rights Claims, University of Missouri School of Law. (online bibliography).

Los Angeles Police Department Homeless Outreach and Proactive Engagement Team Special Study.

Opposing the Criminalization of Homelessness; Building a Human Rights Network (Listing of Law Review articles and other publications).

Police Department Homeless Outreach Programs.

Relevant Monthly Law Journal Articles

Police Interaction with Homeless Persons – Part I – Sleeping and Possessions, 2008 (7) AELE Mo. L.J.

Police Interaction with Homeless Persons – Part II – Panhandling and Use of Force, 2008 (9) AELE Mo. L.J. 101

References: (Chronological)

A Cruel and Unusual Way to Regulate the Homeless: Extending the Status Crimes Doctrine to Anti-Homeless Ordinance, by Hannah Kieschnick, Stanford Law Review, Vol 70 Issue 5, page 1569 (May 2018). (Abstract, with downloadable .pdf of full text).

New policing division focuses on homelessness, neighborhood issues, by Gary Warth, San Diego Union Tribune (March 13, 2018).

Almost No Choice. Homelessness and the Law, Harvard University Civil Rights Civil Liberties Law Review (Dec. 4, 2017).

Law Enforcement is a Critical Component of the Coordinated Effort to End Homelessness, Community Policing Dispatch (December 2015).

A Homeless Bill of Rights (Revolution) by Sara Rankin, Seattle School of Law Digital Commons Faculty Scholarship 45 Seton Hall Law Review 383 (2015).

Police role with homeless population: enforcers or helpers? by Marielle Segarra, WHYY (March 19, 2015)

Readers may download, store, print, copy or share this article, but it may not be republished for commercial purposes. Other web sites are welcome to link to this article.

The purpose of this publication is to provide short articles to acquaint the reader with selected case law on a Articles are typically six to ten pages long. Because of the brevity, the discussion cannot cover every aspect of a subject.

The law sometimes differs between federal circuits, between states, and sometimes between appellate districts in the same state. AELE Law Journal articles should not be considered as “legal ” Lawyers often disagree as to the meaning of a case or its application to a set of facts.

#Legal Updates

0 notes

benrleeusa · 7 years ago

Text

[Orin Kerr] Against the positive law model in the Carpenter cell-site case

The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

My friend and colleague Will Baude blogged yesterday about the positive law model of the Fourth Amendment and its possible role in the Carpenter Supreme Court case. I thought I would chime in on why I disagree. In my view, Will’s positive law approach is seriously flawed as a method of interpreting the Fourth Amendment.

Let me start with some context. In 2007, I wrote an article, “Four Models of Fourth Amendment Protection,” on how courts interpret the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test. I found that, as a descriptive matter, the Justices mixed and matched among four different and often contradictory models for what makes an expectation of privacy “reasonable.” In some cases, they looked to a probabilistic model and considered the likelihood of a privacy invasion. In some cases, they looked to a private facts model and considered whether the outcome of the conduct was acquisition of particularly private information. In some cases, they looked to a positive law model and considered whether the government violated a law other than the Fourth Amendment. And in some (most) cases, they looked to a policy model and considered whether it was desirable to regulate the government practice. Most Supreme Court opinions mixed and matched among the models, sometimes invoking multiple models and sometimes rejecting others.

I argued in my “Four Models” article that this pluralism was desirable. In applying the reasonable expectation of privacy test, the court was trying to distinguish less invasive practices from more invasive practices. But there was no universal method to do that. The court had naturally developed proxy tests for distinguishing more invasive practices that accurately tracked invasiveness in some cases but not all cases. Because no one test accurately distinguished more and less invasive practices, the court couldn’t adopt any one model. Instead, it had developed localized models to guide lower courts: The Supreme Court tended to use whatever model(s) accurately divided less from more invasive practices in that kind of case, and then lower courts would reason by analogy and apply those same models to similar cases. The result was a relatively clever way to distinguish less from more invasive police practices in a decentralized system in which there are thousands of lower court decisions and few Supreme Court rulings.

In their article, “The Positive Law Model of the Fourth Amendment,” Baude and our mutual friend James Stern take one of the four models and say it should be the exclusive test for what is a search. From their abstract:

The touchstone of the search-and-seizure analysis should be whether government officials have done something forbidden to private parties. It is those actions that should be subjected to Fourth Amendment reasonableness review and the presumptive requirement to obtain a warrant. In short, Fourth Amendment protection should depend on property law, privacy torts, consumer laws, eavesdropping and wiretapping legislation, anti-stalking statutes, and other provisions of law generally applicable to private actors, rather than a freestanding doctrine of privacy fashioned by courts on the fly.

At the outset, it’s worth noting that this is a pretty radical theory. The court has looked to positive law in some cases, primarily in the context of property law. But I believe the new theory would expand the positive law focus from property law to any law so long as it is “generally applicable to private actors.” Off the top of my head, I’m not sure which existing Supreme Court precedents on Fourth Amendment search doctrine could survive that revolutionary standard.

The broader conceptual problem with a universal positive law model is that it has no connection to what the Fourth Amendment search test is trying to do. Although positive law accurately tracks notions of invasiveness in some contexts, often positive law has nothing whatsoever to do with anything relevant to Fourth Amendment concerns. Laws are enacted for an extraordinary range of reasons, and a universal positive law model would have to give Fourth Amendment relevance to all of them.

Here’s what I wrote about this in “Four Models” in 2007:

The positive law model has . . . flaws as a universal guide. Like the probabilistic model, the positive law model provides an accurate proxy for the reasonableness of police practices in many cases. Positive law that restricts access to information and places often reflects widely shared notions of which accesses cause significant harms and which do not. Courts, legislatures, and agencies will tend to promulgate rules restricting access to a person’s private material when unfettered access will be harmful, which is a major factor in determining whether a particular government practice is reasonable per se or reasonable only in context. This means that government practices that violate positive law will often be reasonable only in context, and those practices that do not will often be reasonable per se.

Physical intrusions into the home provide an obvious example. Breaking into to your house interferes with your property rights; it also reflects a deeply invasive affront to your privacy and security. On the other hand, watching your house from a public street does not violate positive law; while it may be a bit creepy, it does not amount to a severe invasion of your privacy. In this context, positive law nicely matches our intuitions as to which kinds of police practices should be permitted without a warrant. The positive law model provides a useful proxy to determine when a government invasion violates a reasonable expectation of privacy.

But much like the probabilistic model, the positive law model does not work in every case. In many circumstances, positive law will not accurately capture whether police practices are per se reasonable. This is true for two primary reasons. First, positive laws are enacted for a wide range of reasons that may have nothing to do with whether access by criminal investigators would be reasonable per se. Consider the FAA regulations analyzed in Florida v. Riley, the helicopter flyover case. The FAA presumably drafted those regulations to minimize noise and deter accidents, not to limit the police. Whether the police happened to fly over or under FAA airspace limits has no significant connection to whether particular police flyovers are reasonable only if justified by a warrant. Similarly, imagine a person lives on a 100-acre farm with their small house in the center. Trespassing a few feet onto that person’s property will violate his property rights but not infringe on his privacy. In that setting, positive law does not accurately track the reasonableness of the government’s investigation.

The positive law model may also be insufficient when technology or social practice changes rapidly. The story is a familiar one, as it tracks the standard explanation for the move from Olmstead to Katz. Technology tends to shift the privacy implications of different law enforcement steps. New technologies can divorce privacy and social norms from property law and other statutory and regulatory protections. New technological surveillance tools make it possible to invade privacy without interfering with property or other laws, and they can also make it possible to establish privacy without harnessing positive law. As a result, technological change can make the function of positive law largely arbitrary; it no longer serves the same function it might if the technology remained stable. A test that focuses entirely on positive law such as property will be underprotective with technological surveillance techniques and may prove overprotective with other techniques.

Like the probabilistic model, positive law accurately distinguishes per se and contextually reasonable practices in some cases but not others. As a result, it cannot provide an exclusive guide to what makes an expectation of privacy reasonable.

Baude’s and Stern’s particularly severe version of the positive law model would create some startling results. For example, imagine a police officer sees a car driving at 70 miles per hour in a 40-miles-per-hour zone. The officer, wanting to catch up to identify the car and driver, and write a ticket or make an arrest, speeds at 80 miles per hour to catch the speeder. Under the positive law model, I gather, the officer’s speeding would be a “search” that would presumptively require a warrant.

But this seems entirely arbitrary. The purpose of speeding laws is to ensure safe driving. And the purpose of allowing the officer to speed to catch the speeder is also to ensure safe driving, as an officer can’t stop speeding if the officer can’t speed himself to catch speeders. It seems odd to say that the enactment of speeding laws should make the officer’s chasing after the speeder a “search.” It doesn’t seem to have anything to do with any traditional concerns of the Fourth Amendment.

A second problem with the universal positive law model is that it would become the tail wagging the dog. I wrote about this at length in my recent article, “The Effect of Legislation on Fourth Amendment Protection, 15 Mich. L. Rev. 1117 (2017).” Here’s the problem. If you say that Fourth Amendment law hinges on positive law, then debates over positive law will become proxy battles for the Fourth Amendment. Consider the law, 47 U.S.C. § 222(a), that Baude suggests may create Fourth Amendment rights in cell-site records. If anyone knew, at the time 47 U.S.C. § 222(a) was enacted, that it would have the Fourth Amendment consequence that Baude thinks it should have, then the Justice Department would have fought the passage of that statute just as hard as it fought amendments to the Stored Communications Act that would have imposed a warrant standard for cell-site records.

Put another way, the only reason 47 U.S.C. § 222(a) even exists is that no one thought it had any Fourth Amendment relevance when it was being considered. At time, it didn’t occur to anyone that passing 47 U.S.C. § 222(a) could secretly invalidate 18 U.S.C. § 2703(c), the law that Congress thought was the governing rule on law enforcement access to historical cell-site records. (I had never heard the argument that the statute was relevant to the Fourth Amendment until Richard Re’s blog post in July 2017, and I have been studying and writing about the legal framework for government access to cell-site records since the late 1990s.) If the theory existed at the time, and had been adopted by courts, you wouldn’t have the positive law that is driving the claim. And ex ante, the legislature could no longer provide the benefits of those other laws, because their enactment would be overshadowed by the Fourth Amendment consequences.

Here’s how I summarized the problem of hinging Fourth Amendment interpretation on positive law in “The Effect of Legislation on Fourth Amendment Protection“:

Displacement and independence risk losing the benefits of a dual system of search and seizure in two ways that the independence approach preserves. First, the prospect that legislation will influence Fourth Amendment rulings under influence or displacement can limit the legislature’s ability to enact helpful statutory protections beyond the Fourth Amendment. Influence and displacement take away control from the legislature, either forcing it to enact constitutional-style rules or else making the effect of its statutory design uncertain. Independence frees the legislature to impose whatever rules appear best.

Second, the prospect that legislation will influence the Fourth Amendment creates an incentive to manipulate investigative legislation. Because the executive branch both has veto power over investigative legislation and litigates Fourth Amendment cases, it would likely coordinate the two roles. Legislative debates could become a proxy for Fourth Amendment litigation, with legislative attention turned away from enacting the best statutory rule and towards what state of statutory law might set up the most advantageous constitutional case. Independence cuts the feedback loop and allows the legislative process to proceed without constitutional interference.

A final problem with applying the positive law model in Carpenter is that, like other third-party doctrine cases, it’s properly understood as a case about exhibiting subjective expectations. That is, it’s a case about whether you can maintain Fourth Amendment rights based on how you expose information, not whether you can have Fourth Amendment rights in the first place. Whatever one thinks of the merits of applying a positive law model to what is a search generally, it’s particularly hard to see why it should apply to a case that is about the consent-based concerns of the exposure doctrine and not the search-based concerns driving the four models. For more on this, see Part IV of my amicus brief.

For those reasons, I don’t think the positive law approach is helpful in Carpenter.

0 notes

nancyedimick · 7 years ago

Text

Against the positive law model in the Carpenter cell-site case

The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

Here’s what I wrote about this in “Four Models” in 2007:

The positive law model has … flaws as a universal guide. Like the probabilistic model, the positive law model provides an accurate proxy for the reasonableness of police practices in many cases. Positive law that restricts access to information and places often reflects widely shared notions of which accesses cause significant harms and which do not. Courts, legislatures, and agencies will tend to promulgate rules restricting access to a person’s private material when unfettered access will be harmful, which is a major factor in determining whether a particular government practice is reasonable per se or reasonable only in context. This means that government practices that violate positive law will often be reasonable only in context, and those practices that do not will often be reasonable per se.

Put another way, the only reason 47 U.S.C. § 222(a) even exists is that no one thought it had any Fourth Amendment relevance when it was being considered. At time, it didn’t occur to anyone that passing 47 U.S.C. § 222(a) could secretly invalidate 18 U.S.C. § 2703©, the law that Congress thought was the governing rule on law enforcement access to historical cell-site records. (I had never heard the argument that the statute was relevant to the Fourth Amendment until Richard Re’s blog post in July 2017, and I have been studying and writing about the legal framework for government access to cell-site records since the late 1990s.) If the theory existed at the time, and had been adopted by courts, you wouldn’t have the positive law that is driving the claim. And ex ante, the legislature could no longer provide the benefits of those other laws, because their enactment would be overshadowed by the Fourth Amendment consequences.

Here’s how I summarized the problem of hinging Fourth Amendment interpretation on positive law in “The Effect of Legislation on Fourth Amendment Protection“:

For those reasons, I don’t think the positive law approach is helpful in Carpenter.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/22/against-the-positive-law-model-in-the-carpenter-cell-site-case/

0 notes

wolfandpravato · 7 years ago

Text

Against the positive law model in the Carpenter cell-site case

The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)

Here’s what I wrote about this in “Four Models” in 2007:

Here’s how I summarized the problem of hinging Fourth Amendment interpretation on positive law in “The Effect of Legislation on Fourth Amendment Protection“:

For those reasons, I don’t think the positive law approach is helpful in Carpenter.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/22/against-the-positive-law-model-in-the-carpenter-cell-site-case/

#Law #Lawyer

0 notes

eltonl9731668-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Exclusive Associations And also Mandatory Distributions.

Head of state Barack Obama had a challenging gained victory on Sunday evening (the 7-8th day of Nov 2009) when the landmark healthcare reform regulations (HR 3962) was actually passed along with 220-215 ballots. The SyberWorks Instruction Center LMS/LCMS may be obtained as an organization permit or hosted app. The training from prospective workers or workers is important to the growth as well as productivity from a firm. It has to rotate right if there is actually a compulsory sign for the motor vehicle in a specific lane to turn right. Organizations should prosper to take note of the barriers to efficient training combined with the implementation from elearning instruction options. Education companies have an obligation making a compulsory criticism or issue about a pupil if the pupil has an issue or even wellness concern that may, either in the course of research study or professional training, place the public at considerable threat of damage. To validate that you are actually an obligatory reporter that is actually encouraged that you review C. When you beloved this short article and also you would want to obtain more information about yellow pages residential uk (visit this hyperlink) generously go to our web-page. R.S. 19-3-304, speak to a legal representative, or even your company. Asbestos fiber study is actually a necessary and also important requirement for any sort of worker just before they carry out any type of deal with a domestic or even commercial residential or commercial property in the UK. Any kind of work that interrupts the fabric of a property or even premises must be assessed for asbestos fiber having products just before such jobs are actually commenced. Compulsory user profiles perform certainly not allow adjustments to become put on the customer profile saved on the hosting server. The introduction of obligatory coverage and also going along with training attempts intend to make it possible for experts to establish a recognition from instances from youngster misuse as well as produce disorders which require them to disclose those situations and secure all of them as media reporters. There are some tools of the field that are actually almost mandatory in placing marble floor tiles. Every males and female at the fitness center stared at me. And individuals were actually viewing me like hawks for months then occurred ... Everytime I performed the woodchopper health and fitness stamina instruction workout. Permit me very first mention that most tax-advantaged savings programs entail tax obligation insurance deductible contributions you bring in coming from your operating profit. SyberWorks Training Center (STC) is an Online Learning Monitoring Unit (LMS)/ Discovering Web content Management Unit (LCMS) that delivers complete remedies for handling and tracking all sorts of training at your association-- from e-Learning training courses to conventional classroom instruction and self-paced study plans. The records could consist of payday stumps, present financial institution declarations, as well as verification from repayment for your required expenditures. If a first decision included a selection relating to the health care need of a product or even company, the QIC's revision should entail point to consider by a board of doctors or even ideal health care experts, as well as have to be actually based upon professional expertise, the person's medical records, and clinical, specialized, and also clinical evidence on report. In this write-up our company should cover the relevance from health and safety check in an office. Finally, the federal government desires the tax obligation loan however 'untaxed' retirement amount of money you've spared. The next time the user go to, the necessary consumer profile is actually downloaded once again. A few of the preferred restriction indications are no smoking cigarettes, no trespassing, and no u-turn. It is actually required to quit to three months notice from disengagement from service in some business. When developing a compulsory account, ensure you set the suitable access consents for the customer or even teams of individuals which are going to use this profile. Required Instruction also assists build social peace of mind in the medical care companies they get. It is up to the employer to determine yet, extensively Necessary Training pertains to primary components from resuscitation, fire safety and security and folks taking care of/ lifting. A great deal of business offer ITIL instruction to their workers to establish that improve the key know-how of THIS principles of those workers. Over 260,000 individuals have been imprisoned under federal government drug necessary lowests, and also more will continue to pattern via the device-- also as others are actually provided clemency-- provided that reforms stay slowed. Due to the fact that they deliver helpful and efficient training at lower prices, one of the ideal tactics in organizational understanding nowadays is making use of elearning instruction remedies. Toshiba has actually cultivated an exclusive innovation referred to high definition DVD (HDDVD) and also to assist their layout has cultivated collaborations along with Microsoft and also Universal Films, to name a few. While Snowstorm claims that the. obligatory authenticators will certainly aid with the customer services opportunities, this is just an issue of your time till all hackers can hack authenticator profiles and after that they will definitely correct back at fresh start. Checking out the contested job from obligatory reporting laws in the id from extreme kid misuse and overlook. Acquiring a high degree from commitment is actually a compulsory essential for any sort of powerlifter. When you request for an obligatory reconsideration, you must explain why you assume the selection mistakes. The payday would be actually included in his real estate for estate tax purposes and is drained to whoever obtained the examination. Both California and Connecticut indicate that firms employing 50 or even more employees perform the training. If one wants to be productive in his work venture, just how to take action qualified is actually mandatory to understand. Dishes as well as amusement costs are one of my favorite forms of deductions considering that they can do away with tax. It is actually obligatory to abide by the ratings for the benefit from the customers' understanding regarding the video game. This's where the task acquires captured when done correctly, this may record additional tax obligation cost savings. Gives TWENTY Private Personal trainer Physical exercise Qualifying Courses entailing cardiovascular, efficiency, as well as body weight decline and 4 perk heart cost systems for a huge array from workouts where making a selection. Additionally, make sure that your abatement firm supplies you along with a written claim indicating that each from the compulsory actions were complied with according to your condition policies. The Latin word mandāre, suggesting to commit" or to buy," provides our company the root mand. In current times, employers are discovering that required to place their employees and possible staff members under a drug and alcohol assessment procedure. The teachers are actually trustworthy and also they have actually acquired adequate adventure and also know-how demanded for instruction youngsters. The Federation from Local business, which has certainly not been actually definitely pushing Federal government on required reporting previously, mentioned that can benefit little to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), but warned a one size suits all" system will be actually completely unsuitable" for small companies. . Both the plaintiff as well as the accused can secure an acting ruling.

0 notes

yettaf67824209-blog · 7 years ago

Text

Tax obligation Perks From Relocating to Singapore For Uk Entrpreneurs.

. Private foundations are actually officially required making specific minimal distributions each year. Vat registration is actually certainly not a lawful requirement for a restricted firm however as the cask limit is actually based upon a fairly reduced purchases turn over which for 2008 was 67,000 pounds; very most providers sales turn over exceeds this threshold at which point cask sign up is required. The Necessary Meal Strategy is actually created to sustain pupils that are away from home, normally for the first time. Defra stated that would not be actually rushed right into a decision on the matter, even with telephone calls from some service fourths to use necessary reporting. For as much great as it may do, many people would locate this disparaging and probably even unconstitutional to make such a course compulsory. These wellness & safety and security indicators are actually favorable for both the employers as well as the worker.

Each The golden state as well as Connecticut need instruction for staff members along with managerial authority merely, while Maine's legislation demands unwanted sexual advances instruction for all workers, no matter their roles. When you effectively comprehensive each item from compulsory" or even important to task" training your iTrent training file will certainly be improved. Short term in the feeling that you are actually dedicated to your instruction routine regardless to exactly what holiday is around the bend and also long-term to the point of remaining to lift no matter personal injury and/or several sets from failings experienced. While the general public thoughts has been much baffled concerning the significance from the several plans, those who understand the guidelines entailed as well as which are taking an active part in the controversy appear to become unnecessarily far apart on certain basic propositions. They make sure that youngsters don't hurt themselves during the course of instruction treatments yet they likewise ensure that the kids discover how you can protect themselves as well as their possessions. Yet I locate that if I don't include salt to my diet plan I obtain negative muscle aches when training. The prospects which prefer to pursue a stenographer's career demand specialized training. The dividends gotten off an abroad business are consisted of in the UK parent business' s tax calculation. The nursing field may certainly not pay for to ignore necessary instruction as this assists with team self-confidence and also lawful compliance. This is not unlikely that the fight over required insurance could change coming from the obligation industry to that from settlement, mainly due to the criterion thought to be actually located in contractor's payment insurance. If you don't, the Internal Revenue Service imposes tense charges: an income tax from FIFTY% on the amount that must possess been actually removed. To make it possible for nursing team to satisfy their mandatory instruction demands whether this is refresher training or even as yearly update. From certain note, companies need to send a early as well as complete presentation from documentation in the revision stage. This program is actually needs from STCW '95 Event and is necessary for all maritime personnel. The instruction modules in the Necessary Instruction Training course are appropriate comprehensive to the level of knowing needed to have. The appropriate upline, with the appropriate instruction systems in place is actually necessary to your results. A document of the report is organized for all staff; this report is actually tracked to make sure that all the demanded instruction is completed successfully through all the needed workers. Alcoholic drinks testing is actually extremely crucial even when one staff member is actually revealing signs from on duty usage which may bring about reduced result and not conference delegated aim ats. For more on yellow pages online qld (euestouformaefeliz.info) look at our web-page. IRA saving preparation is a phrase made use of to take good activity to deal with the inheritance tax and to mitigate the income tax obligation repercussions of a double tax on large Individual retirement accounts, 401Ks, and also various other trained pension plans. On-line training is actually coming to be incredibly popular today with time being actually every person's primary element as well as universities ending up being therefore pricey. If the MAC cannot provide a decision or remand the case within the required timeframe, the supplier might seek the allure be actually risen to federal district court. When the administrator renames the documents (the registry colony) on the server to Theman expansion triggers the user profile page to be a read-only profile page, customer profile pages come to be obligatory profile pages. The moment a decision has been reassessed, the choice producer are going to send you two copies from a 'necessary reconsideration notification' to let you know the end result. Vat sign up is certainly not a lawful demand for a minimal firm nonetheless as the barrel threshold is actually accordinged to a rather reduced sales turn over which for 2008 was 67,000 pounds; most business purchases turn over surpasses this limit at which point barrel enrollment is actually obligatory. The Necessary Food Planning is actually designed to assist students that are actually off of property, usually for the very first time. Income tax return preparers that are actually demanded to register must accomplish fifteen hours from continuing expert education and learning (CPE) every year, including 3 hours from federal government tax obligation regulation updates, 2 hours of income tax preparer values and also ten hrs of federal tax obligation rule topics. AHPRA possesses the power to publish details regarding education companies that perform not fulfill their obligatory coverage commitments. Actually, required coverage rules describe the types of circumstances that need to be mentioned to lawful kid protection services. Compulsory reporting rules point out those conditions under which a person is legitimately required to make a record to the appropriate federal government agency in their jurisdiction. Under the new plan the gamers are to be tested during the course of their spring instruction in addition to at least one additional exam in the course of the regular period and also being subject to random screening throughout the regular time. In today's obese population, an effectively balanced diet plan along with six to eight servings of vegetables and fruits daily is actually compulsory. In this particular write-up our experts will discuss the importance from health and safety check in a workplace. Last but not least, the government really wants the tax loan for all that 'untaxed' retirement cash you've spared. The upcoming time the customer browse through, the mandatory individual account is actually installed once more. A number of the prominent prohibition indicators are actually no cigarette smoking, no trespassing, and also no u-turn. It is actually compulsory to surrender to three months notification from disengagement off solution in some business. The returns received from a foreign provider are included in the UK parent business' s income tax calculation. The nursing business can not pay for to dismiss necessary training as that assists with team assurance and also legal observance. That is actually not inconceivable that the fight over necessary insurance policy could switch off the liability area to that of settlement, primarily because of the criterion thought to be actually discovered in worker's compensation insurance policy.

0 notes