What's with the Act's?

[Trekbike]

Why does just about every proposed law now have to be called ...so and so Act?

Do they think it makes the crap they peddle stink less or seem more noble?

Edited May 8, 2013 by Trekbike

[Steelharp]

Nah; it's all just an act. And they're lousy actors.

[Guest Emtdaddy1980]

With all the focus on the three women Rescued in Cleveland and the media attention on what was found inside, I'm really concerned that someone is going to try to ban chains and bondage equipment.

[Garufa]

What is with all the acts?  Why do legislator's feel compelled to submit bill after bill after bill.  Why is the measure of an elected official's "success" how many damn laws they've gotten passed.

[JWC]

What would happen if they showed up and said "well we don't really need new laws, regulations, or new funding, we don't need to declare war. We seem to be all set this session. How bout let's just head on home and see how the next year plays out"

It's a dream of mine. Edited May 8, 2013 by JWC

[nightrunner]

What would happen if they showed up and said "well we don't really need new laws, regulations, or new funding, we don't need to declare war. We seem to be all set this session. How bout let's just head on home and see how the next year plays out"

It's a dream of mine.

Then everyone would cry that the legislators arent doing their job and are lazy.

[monkeylizard]

With all the focus on the three women Rescued in Cleveland and the media attention on what was found inside, I'm really concerned that someone is going to try to ban chains and bondage equipment.

 

No more sex swings in the TGO Non-Firearms Classifieds without a tax stamp and a background check.

[BryanP]

What is with all the acts?  Why do legislator's feel compelled to submit bill after bill after bill.  Why is the measure of an elected official's "success" how many damn laws they've gotten passed.

 

Car repairmen are judged based on how many cars they fix.

 

Programmers are judged on their programming.

 

Accountants are judged on their numbers.

 

So if you call someone a Legislator ...

[sigmtnman]

Simple. It is because they "act" like it will help you, when in reality the laws will end up taking away and harming.

[Worriedman]

Car repairmen are judged based on how many cars they fix.

 

Programmers are judged on their programming.

 

Accountants are judged on their numbers.

 

So if you call someone a Legislator ...

Could they not busy themselves in repealing current bad law?

[JGunner]

Could they not busy themselves in repealing current bad law?

WINNER!!!!

[hipower]

Could they not busy themselves in repealing current bad law?

 

That won't work.

 

It would mean admitting they passed bad laws initially.

[vontar]

What would happen if they showed up and said "well we don't really need new laws, regulations, or new funding, we don't need to declare war. We seem to be all set this session. How bout let's just head on home and see how the next year plays out"

It's a dream of mine.

They seem to feel they are elected to pass laws no matter what.

 

Like when I was in student government for a year in college I knew it was bogus when they told us on day one how many items or bills they wanted us to bring up in session.  I just didn't have time for that with my classes. However, at least one of my bills did pass and got acted on.

 

I purposed the University supply hand soap dispensers in the community dorm bathrooms.

Edited May 8, 2013 by vontar

[Worriedman]

That won't work.

 

It would mean admitting they passed bad laws initially.

 

I was thinking more like going back to some bad laws passed in 1870, and since Naifeh quit before he got his hinney handed to him, I don't there is anybody left that was there then...

[hipower]

Did you mean 1970?

 

Anyway, point take for specifics, but I was thinking more generally. As in like almost all the redundant and superfulous laws and acts that seem to emenate from politicans when they try to justify their on jobs/positions, and try to appear busy and productive.

[Worriedman]

Did you mean 1970?

 

 

No, I meant 1870, referencing such bad law as the "Intent to go armed" clause, and giving themselves the power to regulate the wearing of arms, which never existed prior to that date (and we survived very well as a State without that added little bonus thank you very much).  If today's legislators would simply work on repealing unconstitutional law passed by their predecessors, they would not have to "admit" to being a bunch of money grubbing spineless power hungry cretins.  The crack about Naifeh was evidently a bad attempt at humor...

Edited May 9, 2013 by Worriedman

[hipower]

No, I meant 1870, referencing such bad law as the "Intent to go armed" clause, and giving themselves the power to regulate the wearing of arms, which never existed prior to that date (and we survived very well as a State without that added little bonus thank you very much).  If today's legislators would simply work on repealing unconstitutional law passed by their predecessors, they would not have to "admit" to being a bunch of money grubbing spineless power hungry cretins.  The crack about Naifeh was evidently a bad attempt at humor...

 

Thanks for correcting my impressions.

 

I was thinking 1970 because of your reference to the Jimmy Naifeh era.

[Worriedman]

Thanks for correcting my impressions.

 

I was thinking 1970 because of your reference to the Jimmy Naifeh era.

I thought Naifeh was a student of Gov. John Brown's, (as he fought hard to keep firearms out of the hands of the average individual), much as Brown did when he oversaw the re-writing of our State Constitution as the Democrat in charge of that operation.  Maybe Naifeh has not been around that long, it just seems like he was...

[hipower]

I thought Naifeh was a student of Gov. John Brown's, (as he fought hard to keep firearms out of the hands of the average individual), much as Brown did when he oversaw the re-writing of our State Constitution as the Democrat in charge of that operation.  Maybe Naifeh has not been around that long, it just seems like he was...

 

You quite obviously know considerably more history than I than I do(which wouldn't take much);, but we sure see eye-to-eye on the Naifeh years.