 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/25/2012 6:35 AM, Warp wrote:
>
> And history is written by the victors.
>
Specifically by Victor Ehrenberg and Victor Davis Hanson, among others.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/23/2012 8:28, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Lawmakers define law. The courts interpret it - and sometimes interpret
> it to mean something other than what the lawmakers wrote it to mean.
Or they often have to interpret it to decide whether a particular case is
covered. (Hence the term "case law".)
For example: The carpool lane can only be used by a car with at least two
passengers. Does a hearse with a driver and a dead body count? Does a woman
8 months pregnant count?
Or, from an Oracle/Google point of view, can you copyright an API?
The lawmakers can pass new laws to override cases that got decided in a way
they didn't like, if they want, so yes, the lawmakers make the laws.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2012-05-26 22:05, Darren New a écrit :
> On 5/23/2012 8:28, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Lawmakers define law. The courts interpret it - and sometimes interpret
>> it to mean something other than what the lawmakers wrote it to mean.
>
> Or they often have to interpret it to decide whether a particular case
> is covered. (Hence the term "case law".)
>
> For example: The carpool lane can only be used by a car with at least
> two passengers. Does a hearse with a driver and a dead body count? Does
> a woman 8 months pregnant count?
If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
Technically the child isn't on her lap.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2012-05-28 14:33, Jim Henderson a écrit :
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
>> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
>
> Technically the child isn't on her lap.
>
> Jim
In my province, a child has to be in a car seat until he or she is 63cm
(25in) from the seat to the top of the head, so she could still be fined
for having an unrestrained kid in the car.
Also, she still can't use the car pool lane has you have to have two (in
some cases three) people of driving age to be able to use it. The goal
is to reduce the number of cars on the roads. An infant can't drive a
car by herself, therefore her mom does not qualify to use the carpool
lane, as the baby's presence has no bearing on the number of cars used
by that family.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 29 May 2012 08:24:41 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
> In my province, a child has to be in a car seat until he or she is 63cm
> (25in) from the seat to the top of the head, so she could still be fined
> for having an unrestrained kid in the car.
It's not like she can take the kid out and place it in a child safety
seat.
> Also, she still can't use the car pool lane has you have to have two (in
> some cases three) people of driving age to be able to use it. The goal
> is to reduce the number of cars on the roads. An infant can't drive a
> car by herself, therefore her mom does not qualify to use the carpool
> lane, as the baby's presence has no bearing on the number of cars used
> by that family.
Yes, and that is something that IMHO makes sense. But if the law doesn't
specify that, then generally the cops aren't going to pull someone over
(especially as most cops really dislike having to do paperwork) unless
the situation is particularly egregious.
Seeing one person in the car would be such a situation for a cop on
enforcement duty for a HOV lane.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/05/2012 07:33 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>
>> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, she
>> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
>
> Technically the child isn't on her lap.
Kids on the backseat cause accidents.
Accidents on the backseat cause kids.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/23/2012 3:08 AM, Invisible wrote:
> On 23/05/2012 02:33 AM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
>
>> I'm sort of waiting for a company to get sued for exactly this reason.
>
> Because that, apparently, is how the law works. The result of one court
> case determines what the law is, and until that court case happens, the
> law is undefined.
>
> And here I was thinking that the law-makers define the law...
They do. And some people have learned that you don't worry about a law
until you see whether and how it will be enforced.
And of course some people in authority (like HR folks and high school
principals) have a hard time anticipating that something they regard as
a grand idea may in fact be entirely contrary to the law.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/29/2012 5:24, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Le 2012-05-28 14:33, Jim Henderson a écrit :
>> On Mon, 28 May 2012 08:25:36 -0400, Francois Labreque wrote:
>>
>>> If the 8-month pregnant woman qualifies for using the carpool lane, s
he
>>> can also be fined for driving with a child on her lap.
>>
>> Technically the child isn't on her lap.
>>
>> Jim
>
> In my province, a child has to be in a car seat until he or she is 63cm
> (25in) from the seat to the top of the head, so she could still be fine
d for
> having an unrestrained kid in the car.
>
> Also, she still can't use the car pool lane has you have to have two (i
n
> some cases three) people of driving age to be able to use it. The goal
is to
> reduce the number of cars on the roads. An infant can't drive a car by
> herself, therefore her mom does not qualify to use the carpool lane, as
the
> baby's presence has no bearing on the number of cars used by that famil
y.
>
And that's why laws vary between countries, eh?
In California, it's also about reducing pollution, so you're allowed to
drive electric and hybrid cars in the carpool lane by yourself.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Oh no! We're out of code juice!"
"Don't panic. There's beans and filters
in the cabinet."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:17:35 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> In California, it's also about reducing pollution, so you're allowed to
> drive electric and hybrid cars in the carpool lane by yourself.
Same is true here in Utah as well.
That seems to be becoming more common in the US (at least).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
