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  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:02:58 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

I cant imagine you picking out what is wrong with this but have a nut!

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wi-court-of-appeals/1199846.html

Here is a supreme court fight one that is easier because abrahamson tells you what is wrong with it


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8540609463452326520&q=hempel+v+baraboo&hl=en&as_sdt=4,50

meaning what an abortion they turned the law into.






I see no words taken upside down in their meaning in either case.

Cut the shit, and cut to the chase. What word or words are used 100% opposite of their meaning in context here?



there is absolute no way you could make any kind of qualified conclusion on even one of those cases in the 15 minutes that I have posted them and without looking up every one of the words used to see how THEY use them.

I have no time for warrantless heckling

you are the weakest link, good bye







< Message edited by Real0ne -- 1/7/2012 2:04:20 PM >

_____________________________

"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 #: 101
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:05:54 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		well, first of all (and I dont expect you to go looking back at this miasma) these are definitions with exhortations of context and redifinitions in the actual statutes.

They cover about 10 statutes, so it is a motile ask, you are asking, and Real is more motile than nebulous in addition to the original general definitions. 

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:06:34 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Then let's try one more time.....


Yes, lets...

quote:


"To transport" is an infinitive, not a verb at all, and without tense or voice.


Exactly, because I was using it as an infinitive to use it as the subject of the sentence, to describe how it is ("is" was the verb) different than "being transported".

Just like in the sentence "Transport is a verb", "transport" is an infinitive used as the subject of the sentence.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:09:38 PM   
mnottertail


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

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

I cant imagine you picking out what is wrong with this but have a nut!

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wi-court-of-appeals/1199846.html

Here is a supreme court fight one that is easier because abrahamson tells you what is wrong with it


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8540609463452326520&q=hempel+v+baraboo&hl=en&as_sdt=4,50

meaning what an abortion they turned the law into.






I see no words taken upside down in their meaning in either case.

Cut the shit, and cut to the chase. What word or words are used 100% opposite of their meaning in context here?



there is absolute no way you could make any kind of qualified conclusion on even one of those cases in the 15 minutes that I have posted them and without looking up every one of the words used to see how THEY use them.

I have no time for warrantless heckling

you are the weakest link, good bye








Yup, you got nothing, it was plain when you made the outlandish statement 

You had a chance to explicitly cage your intellectually dishonest statement as fact, but you couldn't, so you  created some dipshit ad hominem, and elided the entire circular and untutored argument in another spiral.



_____________________________

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


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:10:37 PM   
Musicmystery


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

Just like in the sentence "Transport is a verb", "transport" is an infinitive used as the subject of the sentence.


This gets sillier and sillier.

No, it's not.

"To transport" would be an infinitive.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:14:54 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner

What is the legal definition of "transported" in the specific statute that defines "motor vehicle" and "vehicle"?

Not a dictionary definition but rather what is the statutory definition of "transported" in the law the OP is being obtuse about?

The legislature may have felt defining "transported" was pointless as noone with above average intelligence could consider shoes a motor vehicle.

Find the statutory definition of "transported" and the OP will then argue at length that the term "mobility" or "device" or "is" should invalidate it.

Ignorance of the Law is no excuse and it tends to be used by Judges to muzzle the brain dead.



good post!  You seem to have a grip on how they operate with respect to their use of words!  you asked for "their" definition which is exactly right way to approach it.

“Transporter” means any of the following:

(a) A person who is engaged in this state in the business of
transporting and delivering motor vehicles, trailers, semitrailers
or recreational vehicles in tow on their own wheels or under their
own power from a distributor, a dealer, the manufacturer, or a
branch of the manufacturer to the purchaser, or from any location
to a distributor, a dealer, the manufacturer, or a branch of the
manufacturer, and who is a 3rd party with no ownership interest
in the vehicles.

(b) A person who manufactures or installs on previously
assembled truck chassis special bodies or equipment which when
installed form an integral part of the motor vehicle and which
constitutes a major manufacturing alteration, or who is engaged
in modifying or converting previously assembled or manufactured
complete motor vehicles, but who is not the owner of the
vehicles on which manufacturing operations were performed by
that person, if incidental to manufacturing operations the person
transports motor vehicles in tow on their own wheels or under
their own power between the person’s place of business and
manufacturers, dealers and distributors, or delivers them to purchasers.



that is what they give you.  There is a reason for that. 

There conveniently is no definition for "transport"!


as far as the shoes goes a judge could certainly get that to stick until you appealed your ass off and spent several thousand bucks even if you know how to do it yourself all the way to the supreme court.

that is the problem with law today.  who the hell has the time in their lives to straighten this shit mess out.






< Message edited by Real0ne -- 1/7/2012 2:24:54 PM >

_____________________________

"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 isoLadyOwner)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:18:47 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline 		"In grammar, infinitive is the name for certain verb forms that exist in many languages. In the usual (traditional) description of English, the infinitive of a verb is its basic form with or without the particle to: therefore, do and to do, be and to be, and so on are infinitives."

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:19:19 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

I cant imagine you picking out what is wrong with this but have a nut!

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/wi-court-of-appeals/1199846.html

Here is a supreme court fight one that is easier because abrahamson tells you what is wrong with it


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8540609463452326520&q=hempel+v+baraboo&hl=en&as_sdt=4,50

meaning what an abortion they turned the law into.






I see no words taken upside down in their meaning in either case.

Cut the shit, and cut to the chase. What word or words are used 100% opposite of their meaning in context here?



there is absolute no way you could make any kind of qualified conclusion on even one of those cases in the 15 minutes that I have posted them and without looking up every one of the words used to see how THEY use them.

I have no time for warrantless heckling

you are the weakest link, good bye








Yup, you got nothing, it was plain when you made the outlandish statement 

You had a chance to explicitly cage your intellectually dishonest statement as fact, but you couldn't, so you  created some dipshit ad hominem, and elided the entire circular and untutored argument in another spiral.




even a practiced attorney could not have commented on as fast as you did.  you are just puking all over the thread as usual





_____________________________

"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 #: 108
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:19:58 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Good luck with that, professor.

Now how's that active/passive voice elementary English coming along?

Here's the fascinating thing....in English class, clearly couldn't be bothered with such trivial things, and thus, confused them. Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.

It's amazing. Only in America.



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 1/7/2012 2:22:24 PM >

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:24:05 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		'transport'  in those 10 statutes is not being regulated in and of itself, nor are shoes.

Therefore it is not defined in those regulations 

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:27:28 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

no that comment in on topic because it is a shot right over the asswipe attorneys heads.

nothing was vague about my comments.

I understand that no one who has posted to the contrary gets it.




Nothing vague ? really ? You ask people what do they think "Motor vehicles" means, and as a counterpoint post a definition of vehicles. Not only that but you drift off into a world of "shoes" and "asswipe attorney lawyers" and still claim your posts are not vague.

Clearly the definition of Motor Vehicle and Vehicle is that one supplies its own power, the other is just a vehicle. Next you will be including a PC as a vehicle, since it is a vehicle for information.


that was in response to rons

no that is not true.  It is also considered a motor vehicle is it is "drawn" by some form of locomotive 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 Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:31:32 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.


Two minutes for quotes to reinforce what I know doesn't constitute an afternoon digging.

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:32:55 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

'transport'  in those 10 statutes is not being regulated in and of itself, nor are shoes.

Therefore it is not defined in those regulations 


however transport as you can plainly see came into question because the definition as that one person rightfuly asked for was required.


_____________________________

"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 #: 113
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:33:03 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		no they do not.  they have no such expansion of 'locomotive' in that definition.  

I don't think horses are gonna get it, but I am not going to read 10  chapters of cheesehead law to find out.  A waste of thoughts.  

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 1/7/2012 2:34:57 PM >

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:33:29 PM   
Musicmystery


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

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.


Two minutes for quotes to reinforce what I don't know doesn't constitute an afternoon digging.

How's that active/passive thing coming along for ya?

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:34:50 PM   
Real0ne


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

I said:

It is also considered a motor vehicle is it is "drawn" by some form of locomotive device.


thats right the Amish are required to put slow moving vehicle signs on their horse drawn buggies.





< Message edited by Real0ne -- 1/7/2012 2:39:13 PM >

_____________________________

"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 #: 116
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:35:52 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.


Two minutes for quotes to reinforce what I don't know doesn't constitute an afternoon digging.

How's that active/passive thing coming along for ya?


You mean that thing that has been established since page 3 of the thread?

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:36:23 PM   
Real0ne


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

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.


Two minutes for quotes to reinforce what I don't know doesn't constitute an afternoon digging.

How's that active/passive thing coming along for ya?


he has yet to say how it changed the definition in any way


_____________________________

"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 #: 118
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:39:16 PM   
mnottertail


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

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

try reading

I said:

It is also considered a motor vehicle is it is "drawn" by some form of locomotive device.



340.01.(35) “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.
340.01.(74) “Vehicle” means every device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except railroad trains. A snowmobile or electric personal assistive mobility device shall not be considered a vehicle except for purposes made specifically applicable by statute.


Uh.......locomotive..........locomotive........locomotive.......nope...

You read the fuckin thing and show me locomotive in one or both definitions (heres a hint:  those 10 statutes are nothing to do with Amish wagons drawn by dray horses, I bet those are entirely different statutes)  but I aint willing to search that much cheesehead law.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? - 1/7/2012 2:40:17 PM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Now, though, threaten the ego, and the former student will spend all afternoon digging.


Two minutes for quotes to reinforce what I don't know doesn't constitute an afternoon digging.

How's that active/passive thing coming along for ya?


he has yet to say how it changed the definition in any way




Actually I did.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> RE: Ok Law Dawgs! Who wants to take a shot at this? Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125