CallMeShy

Sex offenders under extra scrutiny on Halloween

Google Jeffery Goldberg. (Friday Nov 6 | post #27)

Health Care - Fortville, IN

This isn't truly reform. There needs to be tort reform included as well. The proposed spending will add to our already gigantic debt. The strain on the people will be immense. (Sunday Nov 1 | post #1)

Just as I thought. No intelligent reply just insults because you can't come up with anything else. (Sep 14, 2009 | post #87)

Really. Indiana code IC 9-19-10-3.1 states the following: Sec. 3.1. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), a vehicle may be stopped to determine compliance with this chapter. However, a vehicle, the contents of a vehicle, the driver of a vehicle, or a passenger in a vehicle may not be inspected, searched, or detained solely because of a violation of this chapter. (b) A law enforcement agency may not use a safety belt checkpoint to detect and issue a citation for a person's failure to comply with this chapter. I agree that it does say that a person can be stopped to determine compliance but it also states that a vehicle/driver/pas senger canNOT be detained soley because of a violation of this chapter. Now..having said that, what's your definition of detained? It also states that seat belt checkpoints are forbidden. Doesn't stop some agencies though now does it? (Sep 10, 2009 | post #71)

Fortville police roster is full

Meh, their comment doesn't bother me. Yes, I went and I spoke. So many times people say "Instead of talking..do something." So, I am one to "do something" and then you've schmucks like that "person" that makes a snide comment because of it. No worries. At least I made the attempt to make a change. I doubt they can say the same. (Sep 8, 2009 | post #566)

What was the "real" reason for your son's friend being pulled over? It's a violation of state law to pull over someone for a seatbelt violation only. (Sep 8, 2009 | post #64)

This is SO true. I've never been in trouble. My guy had in the past. (He also went to school with one of the officers...) Well before we met, he got into trouble. Since we've been together, he hasn't. Mainly because I don't allow it. LOL. One day, he was out in his yard doing yard work. An officer turned the corner, he looked up at the sound of the noise, and just went back to work. He didn't acknowledge the officer driving by. The officer turns his car around, gets out of his car, and demands to see my guy's identification. (Papers please!) He asked why. He was then told "I don't need to have a reason." He then told my guy "I thought you had a warrant out but must have been a guy that looks similar to you." This wasn't true of course. Since when do warrants come with pictures? To top if off, this was the officer he had gone to school with. What was he? Ticked because he wasn't praised openly because he was in his squad car? Then there's the time when a friend called FPD to file a report on his daughter's ex-boyfriend who came to the house in the middle of the night. Dad kicked him out and proceeded to yell at the daughter for allowing it. Ex-bf assaults dad then hightails it out the door. Dad calls the police. The police ask the daughter if she has someplace "safe" to go for the night. Dad said "She's staying right here when I can keep him away from her." A couple days later, CPS contacts the dad. Apparently, FPD reported, get this, that the dad was abusing the daughter and that's why they were called to the house. Of course, the case was dismissed because, lo and behold, FPD couldn't "locate the report" on the inicident. It'd be hard to find since it didn't exist in the first place. Shall I discuss the unlawful search of a house? Don't get me wrong. FPD does have a good officer or two and have aided us on the very rare occasion we needed them, such as reporting a theft from our property. My issue is with, what seems to be, the power-hungry attitudes that exist and go unchecked. Don't you dare speak out. You'll then be targeted by them in the future. (Jul 31, 2009 | post #35)

Fortville police roster is full

Very much so. (Yeah..I'm the one that wrote the "Fortville Resident" one. I forgot my log in here..I've since found it.) There was something in the local paper about the 3-2 voting going on. It's true. It seems that 3 of the 5 have NO problem voting yes to everything, especially with regard to spending of money. To the person that made comments about people doing things, ie the water rate hike, I WAS there. I spoke out at the Public Hearing. Did you? I organized a petition and had many signatures. I wrote letters. It did no good. The hike was approved. Add to that, they found out that the cost will now be $1 million BELOW what they thought. They're still hiking the water though. As to the police department....oh the TRUE stories I could tell. (Jul 31, 2009 | post #521)

How about Pro-Responsibility? (Apr 23, 2009 | post #42)

I disagree. While I can see what you're trying to say, I still stand by what I said. There should never have been a law on the books with regard to abortion and legality. Though, one does have to wonder as to how the law came to be. I wonder if it was due to the Hippocratic oath....... (Apr 23, 2009 | post #38)

sigh* I know. It's just unfortunate that the government likes to butt into the private lives of others in such a manner. (Apr 23, 2009 | post #34)

Exactly. You get to direct their care. Wouldn't that be important to a doc? As I said, with regard to the faith-based hospitals, I don't know. I'm not making the call on that without the facts. To do so would be nothing but an assumption. I see I'm going to have to clarify my comment on RvW afterall. By the "worst thing" to have happened, that is in respect to the abortion issue. I'm not discussing any other issues and how bad they are or were right now. That's OT and I'm not going there. I'm saying that there should have never have been a law on the books ever (even post 1890) as to the legality of the issue. It should have been/should be between a doc and the woman. If the doc refuses to perform one, then so be it. She can go elsewhere. If not, then the doc can suck that life out of her. (Yep, I said it. As that's what I think about non-necessary abortions.) I also feel that it should be well within the rights of the doc to refuse to perform one as well. Now, RvW is "debated " and a big topic with regard to any election instead of more important issues. (Apr 22, 2009 | post #28)

You have no say in how a hospital is run if you can admit there. That's new. No, it's not about that. However, you keep going on and on about how this is a way to keep abortions from happening. It's not preventing anything. Go get your privileges and continue to abort. Play it safe for your patients. As to non-elective abortions, I'm not so sure. Those that refuse to perform them would state that the mother dying is part of God's plan or some such thing. Who knows. I hate abortions and think they're "murder" and selfish unless the life of the mother and/or child is in danger or the child is a result of rape or incest. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that I feel they should be illegal. In fact, I don't think ANY law should be on the books about abortion. Roe v Wade is the worst thing to have happened to this country. (Apr 22, 2009 | post #25)