RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:14:38 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

trans·port (trns-pôrt, -prt)

1. To carry from one place to another; convey

car·ry (kr)

1. To hold or support while moving; bear

quote:

is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway

Note the passive voice of "transported" or "drawn"...if you are walking, you are transporting yourself, not being transported. Therefore, shoes doesn't fit.

(Or at least, that seems to me what the intent of that sentence is.)

transporting, transported just different tenses of the word.

you cannot use the verb the way the definition is tated

the vehicle would be your shoes (in or upon) and everything transported by the self-propelled locomotive power of your body if you will.

so that would make your body a motor vehicle, in the way you are masticating and ignoring both that law and the english language.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:29:40 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

your shoes would be the vehicle since they would be the contrivance. If you were barefoot that would not be the case. If you want to split hairs.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:31:42 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

contrivance? now where the hell is that from?

look up the word contrivance and get back to me, you are so lost you dont know if you are afoot or horseback.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:38:47 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

contrivance? now where the hell is that from?

look up the word contrivance and get back to me, you are so lost you dont know if you are afoot or horseback.

the substantial definition of "device"

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:48:00 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Not substantial, not necessary and suffiicient either. You need to know something of semantics if you are going to try to play semantic games successfully.

So what is the point of the OP and this wholly uninformed thread?

Can you get to it and skip the first I have to understand accounting, physics, and the magna carta to understand the farsical misuse you are gonna to hep us to that this secretly indicates to the legal illuminati such as yourself only without all the specious and illusory pedantics?

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 1/7/2012 10:56:01 AM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 10:57:45 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

the lack of academic honesty demonstrated in your above post is precisely why I dropped it.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:29:26 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Original post: You
So according to the state "WHAT" is officially "motor vehicles"?
As we can see the definition of vehicle could as well mean also your shoes!

quote:

you
So according to the state "WHAT" is officially "motor vehicles"?

Seems to be the original question, posted apparently because you are unable to comprehend the defintion. And an exclamatory that the 'vehicle' definition could include shoes.

quote:

you
Its really simple and frankly I am shocked that no one has come forward with the correct answer.

To which I gave you the answer to what is a "motor vehicles" (sic) contained
in the legal definition you originally did not and still do not understand.

quote:

You
its out of the one congress uses LOL

I told you from the get go it looks like cheesehead law and you then prevaricate quite clearly....so some academic dishonesty on your part.

quote:

Me
“Motor vehicle” means a vehicle, including a combination of 2 or more vehicles or an articulated vehicle, which is self−propelled, except a vehicle operated exclusively on a rail. “Motor vehicle” includes, without limitation, a commercial motor vehicle or a vehicle which is propelled by electric power obtained from overhead trolley wires but not operated on rails. A snowmobile and an all−terrain vehicle shall only be considered motor vehicles for purposes made specifically applicable by statute.
so the definition of a motor vehicle based on the law that congress gives for the motor vehicle definition, is not the definition of the motor vehicle under discussion?
in the cheesehead state, it is codified in:
340.01.(35)
Which seems to be fairly straightforward.

my response to your question for about the third but not final time....

quote:

You
I made a flip snide remark about shoes and ron completely sidestepped the point of the topic, but thats alright. no one needed to know it anyway.

quote:

You
the lack of academic honesty demonstrated in your above post is precisely why I dropped it.

But in looking at your intellectual and academic dishonesty I had answered the question more than three times by now, and you appear to be the disingenuous one on all counts.

340.01 Words and phrases defined. In s. 23.33 and chs. 340 to 349 and 351, the following words and phrases have the designated meanings unless a different meaning is expressly provided or the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
(and it is as I said at the outset cheesehead law and you sort of dishonestly left out this bit.)
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/340/01
So, when we look at what is occurring here your academics are less than honest, and the intellect is wholly so.

SO ARE WE LOOKING AT A SKUNK SMELLING HIS OWN HOLE FIRST OR WHAT?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 47

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:39:30 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

you are confused.

from the OP:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

As we can see the definition of vehicle could as well mean also your shoes!

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 48

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:43:00 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Not confused at all. I quoted you saying it.

Comprehension skills, Goddammit!!!

Additional disingenuousness on your part.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 49

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:47:56 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

actually you are completely lost.

the shoes statement stands on its own as illustrating how expansive the definition of vehicle is.

the question also stands on its own asking what a motor vehicle is.

you erred when you combined it all into what ever it is you combined it into.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 50

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:54:25 AM

Raiikun

Posts: 2650
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

transporting, transported just different tenses of the word.

I was pointing out voice, not tense.

To transport (active voice, present tense) is a very different meaning than "being transported" (passive voice, present tense).

And that passive voice is enough to make it clear why shoes aren't intended to qualify as a vehicle.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 51

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:56:49 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

you might want to elaborate on that very different meaning because I do not see it

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Raiikun)

Profile

Post #: 52

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:57:14 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

not at all, since the definition of vehicle must be in context (according to statute) and you have conflated the two from some piecmeal of unrelatedness.

You see, those legal definitions, NOT THE LAW in and of itself, are not stand alone, they cover several statutes as the statute points out. And are only valid in context, not open to pediform interpretations by confused scavengers.

And I gave you the definition of motor vehicle several times, because its the definition in those statutes.

Read what is plainly in front of you for fucks sake, dont begin this vermiform watusi, you are undone, plain and simple. It was is and shall be a di minimous caterwauling buncombe.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 53

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:58:20 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Wow!

Not one response on this???????????????

So much for ignorance of the law is no excuse huh?

Don't confuse ignorance with a complete lack of interest in playing another game.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 54

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 11:59:19 AM

Raiikun

Posts: 2650
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you might want to elaborate on that very different meaning because I do not see it

You really don't see the difference between passive and active voice?

Wow, that's kinda elementary school english stuff there.

(in reply to Real0ne)

Profile

Post #: 55

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 12:01:16 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

Wow!

Not one response on this???????????????

So much for ignorance of the law is no excuse huh?

Don't confuse ignorance with a complete lack of interest in playing another game.

like dancing around issues regarding monetary inflation

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 56

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 12:02:45 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you might want to elaborate on that very different meaning because I do not see it

You really don't see the difference between passive and active voice?

Wow, that's kinda elementary school english stuff there.

I am not saying that I do not see a difference.

I do not see whatever it is that you seem to believe changes the meaning.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Raiikun)

Profile

Post #: 57

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 12:06:40 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

not at all, since the definition of vehicle must be in context (according to statute) and you have conflated the two from some piecmeal of unrelatedness.

You see, those legal definitions, NOT THE LAW in and of itself, are not stand alone, they cover several statutes as the statute points out. And are only valid in context, not open to pediform interpretations by confused scavengers.

And I gave you the definition of motor vehicle several times, because its the definition in those statutes.

Read what is plainly in front of you for fucks sake, dont begin this vermiform watusi, you are undone, plain and simple. It was is and shall be a di minimous caterwauling buncombe.

somwhere in the above posts I said that it can be construed as such.

when people disagree it goes to a court, the judge will construe a meaning.

That judge through our ignorance has the power to construe any meaning he wants with impunity.

shoes do fit the definition of "vehicle" as I have stated and demonstrated.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to mnottertail)

Profile

Post #: 58

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 12:11:02 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

To transport (active voice, present tense) is a very different meaning than "being transported" (passive voice, present tense).

Well, if it's elementary English, you didn't master it either.

"To transport" is an infinitive, not a verb at all, and without tense or voice. "To run," "to type," "to learn" -- these are all concepts. You use them as nouns: I love to swim; "to swim" is the object of the verb "love."

"Being transported" isn't a verb either. The merchandise was being transported--the verb is "was being" (past progressive tense), and "transported" is the object of the verb.

Active voice means the subject is doing something: The shipper transported the merchandise.
Passive voice means the subject was acted upon: The merchandise was shipped.

The tenses you're confusing with voice are:

I shipped the merchandise -- simple past
I ship the merchandise -- simple present
I will ship the merchandise -- simple future
I had shipped the merchandise -- past perfect
I have shipped the merchandise -- present perfect
I will have shipped the merchandise -- future perfect
I was shipping the merchandise -- past progressive
I am shipping the merchandise -- present progressive
I will be shipping the merchandise -- future perfect
I had been shipping the merchandise -- past perfect progressive
I have been shipping the merchandise -- present perfect progressive
I will have been shipping the merchandise -- future perfect progressive.

Feel free to add imperfect could, should, would, might, and so forth for additional tenses.

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/601/01/

< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 1/7/2012 12:15:25 PM >

(in reply to Raiikun)

Profile

Post #: 59

RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 12:12:09 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline