Nitro

That information is not correct. Residents of other countries must indeed apply for a license and pass a test. http://www.dds.ga.gov/drivers/DLdata.aspx?con=1747371440&ty=dl All drivers from other nations, including Canada and US Territories, must pass Georgia's written, road and vision tests to be issued a Georgia driver's license. Knowledge (written) tests must begin at least 30 minutes before center closing time. You should present your Out of Country/International License or Identification card to receive a Georgia license or Identification card. Out of country lic

Really? I guess you missed it then because Ugadawgs98 specifically said that police are allowed to detain and question you if there is reasonable suspicion, the whole point you argued against. I have said they were allowed to do that all along... you are the one who said they couldn't. How about the one you've been incorrectly using all along... the Constitution. You've been using excerpts from it the whole time and not using them correctly. Try reading the WHOLE thing instead of what just suits your agenda. Wow, good for you. #1. There's no such thing as the Miranda

Umm... Ugadawgs98 said the same thing I did and he's law enforcement. Not sure, but I think Lots to Do is also... and he agreed to the same principle. You have about the worse links to try to back up your arguments. You are really going to use the ACLU as your basis? That's 'almost' as bad as using Wikipedia, like you did previously. What part of "the right to remain silent" being an excerpt from the 5th amendment do you not understand? You keep saying this.. you need to READ the whole thing. You, like so many people, read only parts of what laws and the Constitution s

It's definately a hawk. Kestrel's are shorter and more plump than that.

Apparently, it's the police officers on here that don't believe you... not just me. Umm... that is about the dumbest comment I've seen. You're right, they can't force air in to your lungs and stimulate your brain to energize your vocal chords and MAKE you say anything... Are you really that dense that you thought that is what the concept was here? No, the concept is that you are "obligated" to answer questions that are asked of you by law enforcement during an investigation or else there will be consequences, UNLESS it's a violation of the 5th amendment, which allows you

Yeah, because law enforcement never ask questions to witnesses or people involved in crime, but aren't suspects. Say you're sitting in Waffle House and it gets robbed at gun point. You didn't rob it... but you think you won't have to answer some questions from police about what happened? If you refuse, you are obstructing an investigation. You're not answering any questions that would incriminate you because you weren't the one who committed the crime, therefore the 5th amendment doesn't apply.

http://www.dallasplating.net/index.html The Google map on there is not showing the correct location, but they have driving directions that are correct.

They do excellent work and great prices too! I built some brackets for my motorcycle and had them chrome them and my fork tubes and they did a fantastic job. There was a place in Douglasville that does plating and they quoted me $70/each for the brackets. This guy on Old Cartersville did BOTH of them for $35. He also does it correctly with a strike and plate of each element (copper, nickel, chrome), unlike many chrome shops that do just a strike and only plate the nickle and chrome. He was also pretty quick. It only took him a week to do my brackets and a week to do my f

Everyone huh? So, enemy combatants have these rights too? Sorry, no they don't. Illegal immigrants have these rights? Due process? Maybe. That doesn't mean they have Constitution protected rights. It means that we have similar laws to provide certain processes for people who are not citizens. If they were protected under our Constitution, we would not deport illegals, we would fine and or jail them based on their offense. They would be afforded the same rights as any other convicted criminal. They aren't afforded those rights. I see, NOW you are changing your story

Yes, and portions of it have been repealed. There were portions of it that did violate people's Constitutional rights. Yeah, I know.. I get pulled over all the time and questioned about my activity even though I've done nothing wrong. Yeah, there are some law enforcement people who don't follow the rules. But by and large, most of them do. [ I haven't given up any of my rights. I'm VERY familiar with Constitutional law. I don't engage in activities that cause me to loose my rights or give cause to law enforcement to be suspicious of me. And a law enforceme

Umm... I didn't quote anything... I stated it. And don't tell me what I can and can't say. I will say anything I damn well please anytime I damn well feel like it. And FYI, granite is a rock. Thank you.. have a nice day.

Wrong again. Area 51 is NOT private. It's a public owned, government facility, just like every other US military installation. But again, just because it's "public owned" does NOT mean it's not off limits and not restricted access. And, while at Atlanta airport, it's not illegal to take pictures.. they CAN, if they so desire, request that you not do so and they CAN have you removed from the premises if you do not comply. Atlanta airport is NOT a public owned facility. Atlanta airport is a PRIVATE airport that is run and maintained by the city of Atlanta. The property and building are p

As noted above, this IS a free country. If wish to debate it, we will continue to debate it. If you wish not to read it, simply don't come in to this thread.

No, that's NOT all you've been saying and nobody has disputed the fact that simply taking pictures is illegal. Nobody stated that simply taking pictures was illegal. However, that posting with all those 'freedom of photography' is not entirely true. If you don't believe it, read the Patriot Act sometime. And the Patriot Act is fully legal and complies with the Constitution as allow under restrictions placed while in times of war. You stated ALL airports are public places. Not true. You stated that it's not illegal to take pictures in any public place. Again, not true. Don't

And this is exactly why "vigilante" justice is illegal and why we call law enforcement to conduct an investigation. You weren't there... you have nothing to base your "innocent until proven guilty" on. You just started defending this guy without having any kind of information. That is just as bad as the ones who condemn the guy without the same factual information. You weren't there. You don't know what he was doing. You don't know what law enforcement found. If law enforcement showed up and there was nothing illegal going on, he would have been asked about his activity and let go on

Ok, first of all, using Wikipedia to substantiate your claims is not helping you any. Second, there is a BIG difference in "public use" and "public owned. Kroger is a "public use" property... but it's not public owned. Yes, you are correct though, Cartersville Airport is owned by the Cartersville/Bartow Airport Authority. And just why do you really believe the "suspicious" part was that he was middle eastern? Do you have any more facts than any one else here? Do you know something we don't? You are ASSUMING that there was no illegal or suspicious activity. You are ASSU

Suspicious activity gives PROBABLE CAUSE. And if they reports of his vehicle not being tagged correctly, that does also. If he was reported, law enforcement HAS to act. If he was questioned and they found his answers not to be in line with the norm, then they had probable cause. Again, you don't know the whole story. Actually, no they are not all public places. *SOME* airports are public places. Our Paulding airport is a public place because it's own by our county government. Just because it's an airport doesn't not automatically mean it's a "public place." Stockmar is no mo

Exactly what *rights* are being trampled? Are you telling us that if someone see's something they think is suspicious, they shouldn't report it to the authorizes and that said authorities don't have a legal right to conduct an investigation? Did you ever stop to think they authorities questioned this guy on site and maybe something didn't add up and THAT might be the reason he is detained? There's a lot of facts you don't have...

#1. The original post said he was taken in to custody. It didn't say he was arrested. If there is suspicious activity and there ia an investigation being performed by law enforcement (IE: Questioning, etc..) there is no violation of anything in the Constitution. #2. The power plant and airport is NOT a public place. Both are private organizations. You could be asked to leave for any reason or no reason and there's nothing you could do about it. #3. There are plenty of times that it's illegal to take pictures of things out in public view. Try going and sitting outside the gat

Because not every type of tax is base on the value of the item. "Ad Valorem" is latin for "according to value."

They are NOT being denied the right to solicit. As I said, they can freely walk up to you, in your yard or walk up to your door and ring your doorbell. They can hand you their pamphlets, flyers, or ad's. I can see where a government can't pass a law to prevent that. But to pass a law that says an entity can't litter, advertisements or not, is doubtfully out there. If I'm wrong... so be it, but I doubt seriously that you'll find any ruling that says that the courts allow "legalized littering" ESPECIALLY on private property. Your right or any businesses right to free speech DOES NOT

Ok... But that is not the same thing. What you posted is "door to door" sales. It's not littering for advertisement. "Distribution of handbills" means just what it says. If you walk up to my residence and ring my doorbell and hand me a flyer, that is not the same as throwing it in my yard. Since it's not littering, technically, if you throw it in my yard, it is most definitely a form of vandalism. Two completely different concepts from the Supreme Court ruling.

I seriously doubt there is a supreme court ruling on this. #1. What small business is going to have the funds that would allow any kind of dispute to go all the way to the Supreme Court? Why would any big business advertise this way? So, since it's unlikely a BIG business would advertise this way, the only logical thought would be that some small business challenged a local ordinance, the appealed to a state court, and then appealed to the Supreme Court. Just to do litter advertising? Not very likely. #2. If you have tried to contact them and they haven't been responsive and a

Ever though about calling them and simply asking them to stop? It's one thing if you've called and ask them to stop over and over and they keep doing it. But dang, just call them and politely ask them to stop throwing stuff in your yard and that you are not interested in their services. No need to take it to another level unless warranted.

Yes. it WAS posted on the website. "Government Offices Closed Employee Furlough Day" was in the event calendar on the right hand side of the main page.