Two important legal decisions are featured in the press today which highlight the tensions between existing Family Law in England, based on a traditional, British model of a heterosexual nuclear family, and modern society, in which there is a multitude of family compositions.
The first case considered the rights of 2 sperm donors (whose sperm was used to conceive a child for a Lesbian Couple) to be involved in the life of theChild, whom it had always intended would be raised in a nuclear family by the 2 women. In reaching a decision that as a matter of principle, it may be appropriate for a sperm donor to be involved (to varying degrees) in the child’s life, the court had to consider the competing interests of the child, the biological father and the psychological parents. The need for the child to have an understanding of his or her origin and roots also had to be balanced against the potentially detrimental effect of the disruption caused to the primary family unit, by the unwelcomed involvement of the donor.
In the second case, the court addressed the conflict between existingMatrimonial Law and religious laws governing Marriage Breakdown. It is of course well-known, that there are many ways in which the current law in England does not sit well with religious practices and custom under religions such as Orthodox Judaism and Islam, and that this can create difficulties for couples when separating. Traditionally, it has been made very clear that the jurisdiction of the courts cannot be ousted in favour of religious tribunals and that English Law will take precedence when there is a conflict. In this case however, the Judge allowed a young couple in their 20s to use the Beth Din in New York to resolve the issues arising from their separation, in order to allow them to Divorce in terms which were aligned to the practices by which they had lived and married. The case therefore throws open the question as to what extent people who have lived their lives according to different rules and practices should be allowed to determine such matters in line with those rules, rather than having a potentially incompatible solution imposed upon them.
Both cases highlight the complexities which are raised when a specific case raises consideration of issues which are outside of the traditional model, and the way in which the Law is evolving in order to keep up with the realities of modern British society. As a Family Solicitor, it suggests interesting times are ahead.
Contact our specialist Family Law team
If you would like to talk to any of our Family Law Solicitors please contact them on 0800 916 9055, or e-mail enquiries@rjwslatergordon.co.uk.
Our Family Lawyers operate across the country and can offer immediate and accessible representation anywhere in England & Wales.
When people hear that someone was arrested for a DUI, they automatically assume that this means that they were driving while they were drunk. Although this might be the most common cause of a DUI arrest, the actual term is driving under the influence, and it is not limited to alcohol. Many people are arrested for a DUI or a DWI each year because they were driving while they were under the influence of a narcotic or a prescription drug. Therefore, it is important for you to fully understand the impact that your medication can have on you before you get behind the wheel.
What if I have a Legal Prescription?
Many people assume that having a prescription makes it okay to operate a vehicle after taking medication. Unfortunately, your prescription is not going to offer you any legal protection if you are arrested for a DUI. The most important thing to know about any prescription drugs that you are taking is whether or not they cause drowsiness. In many cases, a medication that causes drowsiness can make a driver appear to be intoxicated. This problem can be exacerbated if you happen to mix two different medications together. For example, if you are taking a medication for your nerves that causes drowsiness and then you also take NyQuil for a cold, you are basically setting yourself up to be too tired to drive or speak in a coherent manner.
Can My Doctor Get My DUI Waived?
No matter what reason your doctor had for giving you a specific prescription, they will not be able to offer you any legal protection from a DUI conviction. In fact, your doctor and the pharmacy will be protected due to the warning label that is on your medication. As long as the label indicates that the medication can cause drowsiness or any type of altered behavior, you will most likely not be able to assign any legal responsibility for your issue to anyone but yourself. This is why it is imperative to always read the warning labels on your medication and to take the proper steps to avoid mixing medications that could have an adverse reaction to each other.
What Actions Will Cause a DUI Arrest?
Simply being drowsy is not enough for an officer to arrest you, but some of the side effects that accompany drowsiness will be. For example, if you are pulled over while driving in Orlando, Florida and your speech is slurred, you are definitely going to deal with legal issues. Other things that an officer will look for include delayed reactions, bloodshot eyes and the inability to pass a field sobriety test. It is also important to note that some medications can cause you to fail a breathalyzer test. However, even if you pass a breathalyzer test, you can still be arrested if you appear to be under the influence of something. If you find yourself in this situation, there are many Orlando DUI lawyers in the area.
In addition to prescription medication, some over the counter drugs can also cause you a lot of issues while driving. NyQuil is a prime example because it contains some alcohol, and it will cause you to become very drowsy. Taking any type of sleeping pill before you begin driving is also a very bad idea that could lead to an accident and even a DUI arrest.
Freelance author Anthony Joseph writes on many different legal subjects, and contributes this article toward raising DUI awareness. The Orlando DUI lawyers at the law firm of Katz & Phillips know the drunk driving laws better than anyone. If you’ve recently received a DUI charge, contact one of their attorneys for a consultation regarding your case.
Jenelle Embrey of Linden, Virginia, has started an online petition drive to bring federal officials’ attention to Jeep vehicles after she and her father watched two people burn to death in their Jeep Grand Cherokee after a highway accident. According to a news report in Consumeraffairs.com, Embrey and her father were involved in a collision last year. When they got off their vehicle, they saw a Jeep that was on fire. A mother and her two teenage children were trapped inside. While her father was able to pull one of the teens out, the woman and her other child burned to death.
Pinto for Soccer Moms
The article states that this was one of 270 fatalities reported as a result of Jeep fires just in 2012. Embrey’s petition is addressed to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and has been posted on the change.org site. This is apparently not a new issue. Three years ago, the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) filed a 69-page petition with regulators that spelled out the problem in great detail. The investigation had previously focused on 1993-2004 model Jeep Grand Cherokees but was later expanded to include 1993-2001 Jeep Cherokees and 2002-2007 Jeep Liberty models.
Clarence Ditlow, executive director of CAS calls these vehicles “Pinto for soccer moms.” He likens these Jeep vehicles to the defectively designed Ford Pinto vehicles that burst into flames on impact. Ditlow says the Jeep vehicles have so far caused 185 fatal fire crashes with 270 deaths and numerous burn injuries. He says that the 1993-04 Grand Cherokee has a fatal crash fire occurrence rate that is about four times higher than SUVs made by other companies. These vehicles have their fuel tanks installed behind the rear axle, which makes them prone to burst into flames following a rear-end collision. In the newer Jeeps, the fuel tanks are located ahead of the rear axle.
Millions in Danger
However, Chrysler insists that the change was made for design reasons and not due to safety concerns. The fact remains that millions of these defectively designed Jeep vehicles are still on our roadways and millions still travel in them. NHTSA is currently in the final step of a process to determine whether these issues warrant a recall. A recall could affect up to 5.1 million vehicles.
After what this family and hundreds of other families have been through, it is appalling that these vehicles are still on the roadway. Automakers are notorious for denying defects and putting profits before the safety and well-being of the people who buy their vehicles and make them profitable. Chrysler should do the right thing and recall these defective vehicles before more lives are tragically lost.
If you work toward a human services degree it is likely you will have a chance to try a hands-on approach for your chosen occupations.
Would-be nurses and doctors go through clinical trials, future social workers volunteer in the community, and student teachers go into the classrooms to learn their trade. Simulated courtroom proceedings offer the same training and experience for criminal justice students.
Learning Through Trial and Error
Until you’ve tried something, it is difficult to know how it will work. Like students working toward any human services degree, you are more likely to have a successful start if you have already had the opportunity to try and fail. A simulated courtroom trial offers you just such an opportunity, a chance to role play different methods toward achieving justice for the defense or the prosecution.
In a simulated courtroom, criminal justice students are able to act in ways that may or may not be successful in a real courtroom. The fact that it’s not real, of course, means that no one is being put in real jeopardy. If you have heard a certain method does not work but you are unsure why, the simulated courtroom can give you the time and place to see for yourself. Lessons that result in failure are much more easily remembered than those that are just tested on paper.
Seeing the Process in Action
Simply reading about courtroom procedures and requirements is not enough to understand the intricate workings of the process. Getting to see these elements firsthand can help the criminal justice student get a better understanding of why they are necessary and how best to work within them.
For many students, a criminal justice education will occur outside of a courtroom, making it difficult to keep proper courtroom behavior and proceedings in mind. Having the opportunity to work in a mock trial gives you the framework to properly provide your information to the court. This can help you avoid actions and behaviors later that will cost your case instead of advancing it.
Experiencing the Moment
One of the most difficult aspects for criminal justice students to understand is how to think both in terms of strategy and in the moment. Just as nursing students learn how to deal with emergencies, it is essential for you to have the opportunity to react in a controlled situation. This is an exercise in both controlling your behaviors and in thinking fast.
Lawyers have years of learning to work in a courtroom, but most criminal justice occupations are more comfortable working in the field. Still, getting the chance to be put on the spot in an intimidating setting where you are graded can help you be better prepared for thinking when faced with a real case.
Any human services degree will require you to learn about many facets of the job. Being able to experience some of the more rigid elements can help you prepare for dealing with courts.
While you are not likely to spend much of your time in a courtroom setting, nearly all criminal justice graduates are guaranteed to need to speak in court during the regular course of their jobs. Having experienced a simulated courtroom proceeding will help prepare you for a part of the job that could be intimidating.
Health complications and their associated treatment are, in most cases, the most stressful experience that an individual will face. The worst case scenario therefore would be where standards are not met in such treatment and things, inevitably, go wrong.
The law provides individuals with a route to make a claim against medical professionals where care standards are not met. Such a claim would be brought under the heading of clinical negligence. Claiming for negligence in such a scenario is somewhat complicated as there are a number of legal principles that must be considered.
Legal Principles
Medical professionals owe what is called a ‘duty of care’ to those individuals to whom they provide a service. This means that a minimum standard of care is expected of them and that they must not act negligently. A claim for clinical negligence will arise in circumstances where this duty of care has been breached. Such a breach may occur, for example, where an incorrect medication dosage is administered resulting in injury or death, or where a failed or delayed diagnosis has been given.
While it is easy to see that a duty of care exists between a medical professional and his or her patient, it is more difficult in clinical negligence claims to prove that this duty has been breached. The reason for this is due to the fact that the medical profession is a highly specialised field and, in order for a clinical negligence claim to be successful, you must prove that there were errors in the treatment you received and that those errors caused the injury for which you are seeking compensation.
Further to this, not only must you prove that there were errors in your treatment, you must also prove that these errors were of such a nature that no competent medical professional would have made the same errors in the same set of circumstances. This can be a stumbling block for a lot of claims as it relies on the use of experts in the relevant medical field who have to give evidence that, if faced with the same set of circumstances, they would not have administered the treatment complained of. In other words, to prove that there were errors in your treatment, you must get another similarly qualified expert to give evidence that he or she would not have administered the same treatment.
This difficulty is tempered somewhat by the fact that you only need to prove that it was more probable than not that no competent medical practitioner would have made the errors in your treatment.
You must also consider the fact that you have to prove that the errors materially contributed to your injury. While there have been great advances in the field of medicine and medical treatment, there are still numerous instances where our understanding of certain conditions is lacking. A historical example of this, although not related to a claim in clinical negligence, is the various asbestos-related illness claims brought since the 1930s. It took a while for the medical profession, and thus the courts, to recognise that, on the balance of probabilities, those workers exposed to asbestos and asbestos fibres suffered a greater risk of contracting asbestosis or mesothelioma.
It can be seen, therefore, that this area of law is ever-changing.
Claiming for negligence
If you are claiming for negligence, the first port of call for those considering a claim would be to consult a solicitor. There are specialised clinical negligence solicitors who are experienced at making initial assessments of the strength, or otherwise, of your claim. Clinical negligence solicitors can investigate your claim and, where necessary, obtain the expert evidence required to support your claim. It must be noted that in many cases, if you wish to pursue a claim for clinical negligence, you must do so within a period of three years from the date of the accident or treatment. An clinical negligence solicitor can, however, provide advice in relation to this are there are exceptions to the three year rule.
Employers must not charge for personal protective equipment
Although there is nothing more precious than human life, I regularly hear stories about individuals who have been harmed during an accident at work – and these injuries might have been prevented if duty-holders simply provided adequate PPE.
I can understand that these are troubling economic times, but after implementing additional methods to prevent staff members from suffering personal injury, managers must supply appropriate PPE when hazards still remain – even if these items are expensive.
However, when a company attempts to recoup the cost of PPE by charging employees, this practice is not only wrong – it is illegal.
According to Section 9 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, “No employer shall levy or permit to be levied on any employee of his any charge in respect of anything done or provided in pursuance of any specific requirement of the relevant statutory provisions.”
Although that statement is self explanatory, it has been reported that some building firms may have introduced vending machines which provide employees with PPE.
Allegedly, the Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians(UCATT) know of at least one company which uses these dispensers – and have urged the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to prevent other organisations from following suit.
If these vending machines charge employees for potentially lifesaving equipment, then this could be an illegal and inappropriate way to reduce risk. Furthermore, Regulation 4 of The Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 states that PPE must be capable of fitting the wearer correctly. If employees are not given the opportunity to try these items on, then the apparel could be ineffective.
If the UCATT’s claims are correct, then companies who use these vending machines could be breaking the law and putting the lives of their employees at risk. Hopefully, the HSE will step in and quickly remove these dispensers from workplaces.
Generally speaking you are being bullied if someone or a group of people are acting in an offensive, intimidating or malicious way towards you. Or if they are abusing their power to undermine, humiliate or injure you.
Examples of bullying at work include:
- Spreading malicious rumours or insults
- Copying people who don’t need to know into memos that are critical about someone
- Overbearing supervision
- Unwelcome sexual advances
- Making un-founded threats about job security
- Intentionally blocking promotion or training opportunities to prevent job progression
- Deliberately undermining a competent worker by overloading them or by constantly criticising their work
Steps you can take if you’re being bullied at work:
- Consult your employee handbook or company policy documents
Every company should have policies and procedures in place to protect employees from bullying and harassment. If you feel bullied at work, ask to see these documents and check to see whether the way someone is treating you can be classed as bullying. These documents should also give you an idea of what you can do if you feel bullied and what support you can expect from your employer.
- Get advice
If you do feel bullied, it’s worth approaching HR, your line manager or a colleague you are comfortable around, and expressing your concerns. They should be able to help guide and support you and may be able to take action on your behalf. If you are a member of a Trade Union you should also contact your representative for advice.
- Keep a diary
Keeping a diary can help you make a formal complaint or legal case against bullying at work, so it’s really important that you keep a record of any instances where you’ve felt bullied. That can mean noting down comments or actions that you have felt have hurt and intimidated you, as well as where and when this occurred, if there were any witnesses etc.
It’s also advisable to keep a record and print out of any email or web exchanges – where you feel bullying has occurred.
- Tell the person bullying you to stop
Even if you’ve asked the person or group bullying you to stop, it’s worth asking via a written or email memo that expresses that you feel bullied as a result of their behaviour and clearly outlines what behavioural aspects you object to. Be calm, be clear, be honest – don’t be aggressive. And keep a copy for your diary/evidence. And ask HR, a line manager or a Trade Union representative for their advice and support or to act on your behalf.
- If the bullying doesn’t stop, consider formal action
Your workplace should have formal complaint procedures in place. So ask HR to guide you through the process of making a formal complaint – or, if you’re afraid to approach HR, ask organisations like the Citizens Advice Bureau for their help.
- Consider asking for mediation
After you’ve made a formal complaint, you might want to consider asking HR to organise formal mediation (available from third party organisations like ACAS) between you and the person bullying you. This might be especially helpful in a situation where there’s been a change in management, work requirements or organisational style. Your Trade Union rep and the Citizens Advice can help you decide if this is right for you if you don’t feel able to ask HR about the pros and cons.
- As a last resort, consider taking legal action
If you’ve tried all of these avenues and are still being bullied at work, then you might want to seek legal advice and determine whether your case can be taken to an employment tribunal.
It’s important that you have tried to resolve the problem using the steps above before you take legal action, as records you’ve kept and the steps you’ve been seen to take can be used at tribunal to help make your case.
Are you being bullied at work? Do you have any tips you can share with people going through a similar situation?
Author Bio
Rob Hawkins is a freelance copywriter who writes for a variety of websites, including specialist personal injury solicitors RJW.
February 1, 2013—Tracy, California—A construction worker was killed when an 1,800 pound piece of concrete fell on him, pinning him beneath its weight and crushing him, according to KCRA News
. The worker was engaged in cleaning out a concrete truck at the time of the incident.
The 47-year-old victim from Whittier was working on contract for Express Chipping at the time of the tragedy which happened on Linne Road. He was removing concrete buildup inside a truck owned by A&A Concrete supply when he was pinned inside the truck by falling concrete. He was pronounced dead at the scene by rescue workers.
Cal-OSHA is conducting an investigation into the incident.
Construction Accidents Prove Fatal for Many Each Year
Construction is still one of the most dangerous occupations according to information compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In 2011, 759 people were killed in construction accidents in the United States, or more than two per day. Most construction accidents involve falls, objects falling onto workers, or vehicle-related crashes.
Owners of construction firms and the owners of the sites at which they work both have an obligation to create a safe work environment for employees and visitors to the site. If they fail to do so, they can be subject to government sanctions as well as liability for personal injury.
Who Is Responsible For This Man’s Injuries?
This case may be complicated from a legal perspective because the man was apparently working for one company on another company’s equipment. That means that the liability may stem from negligence on the part of the employer in allowing the man to work in dangerous conditions, from the owner of the truck for creating the dangerous conditions or both.
A personal injury lawyer must examine the facts of the case to make a determination as to who holds liability for the man’s death in this case. Once that is established, the family may be able to file a wrongful death suit against the person or company that is deemed responsible for the worker’s death. Wrongful death suits usually include damages for lost future earnings as well as loss of love and companionship.
What Should I Do If I am Involved in a Construction Accident?
If you are hurt in a construction accident, your first responsibility is to seek medical attention. You must be sure that your health is not in danger before considering any other possibilities. However, once you have ensured that your health is being taken care of, you should consider your rights to file a personal injury suit against the employer, the work site owner, or both.
A personal injury attorney can help you recover damages for your injuries including medical bills, sums for your mental anguish, pain and suffering, and lost wages while you recover. You may also be entitled to other types of compensation so that you can pay for increased living expenses or other costs. Talk to a personal injury attorney today to protect your rights.
Television programs showcase high-powered and highly paid attorneys litigating dramatic cases with significant outcomes. The reality of the legal field is much different. Beginning and maintaining a career in law also has more than a few unwritten rules. Some requirements are universal to all lawyers while some are of greater benefit to litigators or transactional attorneys. Being an attorney is not for everyone.
Self-Awareness
Above all else, prospective lawyers must have a great deal of self-awareness. Any attorney that performs work incorrectly will endanger another person’s freedom or produce work that leads to costly litigation. Successfully training to become an attorney requires hard work and dedication to the field. Any distractions, doubts, or other life concerns will greatly inhibit one’s educational and professional career. Prospective lawyers must have the ability to look at their own lives and make an unbiased and calculated assessment of their own flaws and work to correct those flaws.
Work Ethic and Motivation
Attorneys must have a high work ethic. Simply being authorized to practice law normally requires a law degree, which requires three years of law school. At school, students are exposed to the Socratic Method, a method of challenging the student’s beliefs in front of the class. This potential for social embarrassment is both a great motivator to do well and a great source of discouragement for someone on the fence about law school. Additionally, obtaining a job right out of law school frequently requires a professional connection to a firm in some capacity. The most common source of this connection is an internship acquired during the summer.
Attorneys who receive a high salary from a firm will be expected to meet a high number of billable hours in a particular year. Billable hours can be misleading; most attorneys find that of all the time spent servicing a particular client’s needs, they may only bill every third hour or so. Attorneys will spend countless hours doing research and performing many necessary tasks that cannot be attributed to any particular client. Attorneys must still meet these billable hours requirements or be dismissed from the firm.
Attorneys who accept cases on a contingency basis, such as many personal injury attorneys, normally will not receive compensation for their time without any recovery for the client. If the client cannot afford to pay discovery costs or filing fees, the attorney may be willing to float those costs in the hopes of receiving a settlement or even a judgment. In other words, an attorney may have his or her own money tied up in a client’s case. If the amount is great or if the firm is small, this can be a source of stress for an attorney.
Focus
All attorneys must also have analytical personalities, an eye for detail, and an excellent memory. Law heavily relies upon precedent and attorneys who can remember details about binding or at least persuasive cases in that particular jurisdiction will have a substantial advantage over those that cannot. Specific offenses and tortious acts have specific elements that vary in specific jurisdictions, each with their own qualifiers created by hundreds of years of case law. Even the trial and appellate courts are not always named consistently; unlike most states, New York calls its trial courts the “Supreme Court,” which can throw off some attorneys not experienced in New York law. This is one reason why practicing attorneys such as hometown lawyers specialize in one or a few areas of law; mastering every field is just not as efficient for them or their clients.
Quality Interpersonal Skills
Attorneys that litigate cases will benefit greatly from an outgoing personality, but all attorneys will need quality interpersonal skills. Depending upon an attorney’s particular area of practice, they will meet with defendants, prosecutors, plaintiffs, defendants, opposing counsel, co-counsel, witnesses, investigators, judges, and various other parties. Meeting with all of these people will require patience, eloquence, and an understanding of both parties’ respective positions so as to leverage the situation to the client’s best interests.
Transactional attorneys will also require interpersonal skills. Often, clients are uncertain or vague about their specific goals and require an in-depth conversation to clarify matters. Some signatories to a contract can be apprehensive about the inclusion of certain clauses and require an attorney to explain why said clauses are included in the contract. Transactional attorneys may also have to persuade unwilling clients to engage or not engage in certain conduct.
Determining in advance whether a career in law is right for you is difficult. Law is a prestigious profession that requires a high degree of training and proficiency. Lawyers must understand the law, speak with clients to understand their needs, and interpret the law and apply to the client’s situation. This requires an array of learned skills that must be applied perfectly. For those select few who consider law to be a calling rather than a career, becoming a lawyer can be the start of an intellectually, spiritually, and financially rewarding career.
Author Anthony Joseph contributes this article for those considering a life in the legal field. At Hometown Lawyers, New York, there are highly skilled lawyers featured in single categories of law, including: divorce, dwi, personal injury, bankruptcy and criminal law. Additionally the directory qualifies its attorneys by knowledge, communication skills, confidence style, experience in judgment, ethics and ability to respond quickly.
January 28, 2013—Los Angeles, California—A motorcyclist died in a crash that was caused by a semi truck being driven illegally on the Arroyo Seco Parkway, according to the Los Angeles Fire Department. The Highland Park Patchreports that the motorcycle rider was ejected from his bike when the motorcycle collided with a big rig that cut him off. He was transported to an area hospital where he died.
The California Highway Patrol investigated the incident and stated that a 59-year-old male was riding his Harley Davidson in the number three lane at an undetermined rate of speed. The truck cut him off, causing him to crash into the off-ramp. It is illegal for semi trucks to use the Arroyo Seco given the size of the lanes. Authorities emphasized the importance of calling 911 if witnesses observe a big rig truck getting on the 110.
Restrictions on Highway Use May Lead to Liability
When a driver is performing an illegal action, negligence per se may apply if the driver causes injury to another person. In other words, when you are breaking the law, you may automatically be considered negligent even if you might have escaped liability under other circumstances.
This is important information for those who are injured in collisions caused by drivers who are breaking the law. If a driver is considered negligent, he or she may be liable for damages for your injuries, including medical bills, pain and suffering, and other costs.
In this case, the fact that the truck driver was using prohibited lanes could mean that the truck driver was behaving negligently. Of course, the driver also allegedly cut off the motorcyclist which would also constitute negligent behavior.
Big Trucks Involved in Crashes at Higher Rates than Other Vehicles
According to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, there are approximately 4,300 fatal crashes involving large trucks per year and another 77,000 injury crashes. This represents 11 percent of all fatal crashes and four percent of all injury collisions. However, large trucks represent only three percent of all vehicles on the road at any given time. That means that big trucks are involved far more often, statistically, than cars in fatal and injury crashes.
The problem is actually more severe than even these numbers suggest. One reason that the percentage of injury victims in truck accidents is so much smaller than fatalities is because victims are far more likely to die in one of these crashes than to be injured. Furthermore, the victims most likely to be killed in such a crash are those in a passenger car or on a motorcycle rather than the driver of a large truck.
Victims who have been injured in a semi-tractor-trailer crash should contact a personal injury attorney immediately. There are laws in place that may allow you to collect damages such as costs of medical treatment, payment for your pain, suffering and emotional trauma, and even lost wages and increased living expenses as a result of your injuries.
Speeding seems harmless when you’re flying down the interstate and almost necessary when you’re almost late for work. However, speeding, according to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), is the third most common contributor to auto accidents and takes approximately 13,000 American lives every year. These speed-related accidents cost $40 billion annually. That statistic means that for every minute that Americans save by speeding, U.S. society pays $76,000.
Police departments have dramatically reduced fatalities caused by driver impairment and by not wearing seatbelts. Speeding, unfortunately, remains an unsolved challenge. According to the National Safety Council, police, road engineers and private sector companies can work together to eliminate speeding. These four methods are commonly used in jurisdictions around the country.
Method One: Automated Speed Enforcement
The light has just turned yellow. You push your gas pedal so that you can speed through the intersection. As the light changes to red over your windshield, you notice a camera perched near the traffic signal. A few days later, you receive a letter with an unmistakable photo of your car. The letter details the speed at which you went through the intersection.
Cameras provide ongoing speeding enforcement while having minimal negative effects on the flow of traffic. Police can skip observation, chase and citation, which keeps them out of potentially unsafe situations. According to research from the National Campaign to Stop Red Light Running, cameras cut crashes at intersections by between 25 and 30 percent. As long as the public knows that police are using cameras and the police department mounts an effective media campaign, automated enforcement with cameras can be an excellent deterrent for speeders.
Method Two: High-Visibility Anti-Speeding Campaigns
Combining a blitz of speed limit enforcement with an aggressive media campaign against speeding and other aggressive driving behaviors can significantly reduce driver speeds in a community or even across an entire state. This strategy has been employed successfully in the past to curb impaired driving as well as refusal to wear seat-belts The NHTSA publishes information on preparing one of these anti-speeding campaigns in its “Guidelines for Developing a Municipal Speed Enforcement Program.”
Method Three: Strategic Road Engineering
When roads are planned, engineers should employ measures to control speeding by adding in physical deterrents. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers, some good examples include vertical deflections, such as speed bumps, speed tables and raised intersections; horizontal shifts such as neighborhood traffic circles; methods to narrow roadways like adding center islands; and closures like diagonal diverters that essentially force drivers to take other routes.
In addition to strategic road building, police can calm traffic by adding speed detectors on particularly troublesome roads. For instance, if police notice frequent speeding and speeding-related crashes on a certain highway, then they can erect speed signs letting drivers know how fast their vehicles are moving. These speed signs are also effective in construction zones.
Method Four: Driver Monitoring
Commercial vehicle operators or companies who provide their employees with vehicles can take measures to make sure their drivers avoid speeding. Fleet management devices like speed monitors, speed logs or speed regulators can discourage commercial and company car drivers from barreling down the highway.
Driving without going over the speed limit cuts auto insurance costs for everyone. When drivers avoid speeding, they also save lives. So make a special effort to slow down or to leave for work on time. The life that you save may be your own.
Despite these measures, reckless speeding can still occur. A wrongful deathattorney can help if you or a loved one is the victim of a reckless driver.
My involvement in a taxi cab accident taught me a lot of tough lessons. After driving around the same block in Chicago for 45 minutes to find a parking spot, I finally saw my opportunity. A car ahead of me pulled out of a parking lot onto the street, and he’d left a spot open right at the front of the lot! I turned left to enter the parking lot when a taxi cab behind me smashed into my driver’s side door so hard that it set off my airbags. The cabbie later claimed that he was trying to go around me from behind. Because I wear glasses, the impact of the airbags bruised and cut my face. Luckily, my wife had no injuries and she was able to get the cab driver’s plate number and company information. She also exchanged insurance information with him. We’d never been in an accident before, and we were both so shaken up that we couldn’t remember what we had to do. The cab driver seemed genuinely sorry and assured us that we didn’t have to worry because his insurance would pay for everything, so there was no need to call the police. Our first mistake was believing him as we drove off to a hospital.
My left eye swelled up badly; I felt worried because of the bleeding and the fact that I couldn’t see out of it for 24 hours, but there was no damage serious enough to warrant an operation. The ER visit was expensive because they ran extra tests on me since I had slight whiplash from the impact. My wife first called our car insurance company and explained to them what had happened. They asked her if she had taken any photographs of the damage, and we had not; that was our second mistake. There was a big dent on our car, but the cab didn’t have much more than a broken headlight from what we could remember. When she described the accident to our insurance representative, he deduced that the cab driver was at fault, which was just as we’d suspected, since he made an illegal move by crossing the center median while trying to go around us. My wife immediately called the cabbie’s insurance company to begin to file our claim with them. Unfortunately, what we didn’t know was that the cab driver’s insurance had expired more than six months ago. We had to argue with our own insurance company to try to help pay for the medical bills since our plan did not cover accidents with uninsured motorists.
The police couldn’t help us, even though we had his license plate number because they weren’t there after the accident to confirm our story, so we were left in a case of our word against the driver’s. The cabbie also gave us phony contact details, so we filed suit in small claims court against his taxi company for our damages. The company was able to trace the driver using the plate number and they forced him to settle with us in mediation to avoid going to trial and creating a bad name for their company. After this nightmare to recover more than $2,500 in total expenses, we’ve learned to always call the cops, take photos before moving our vehicles in an accident, and check the driver’s insurance information carefully! I hope others reading this story never have to go through a similar experience.
Byline: Ryan Devereux found a lawyer that specialized in taxi accidents when he was struck with his bad cab experience.
It doesn’t matter if you’re attending college online or on campus, your safety is paramount. You may be walking from your dorm to class, or from your car to the library; staying aware of your surroundings and following proven safety tips will help keep you from becoming a victim. If you’re a college student, here’s how to stay safe:
1.Don’t Walk Alone
According to Thomas Kane, president of The College Safety Zone, it’s important that you never walk alone, especially at night. It’s a well known fact that there is safety in numbers. Criminals will target people walking by themselves long before they go after a group. If you have to walk anywhere, make sure that you take along a buddy. If you must walk by yourself across a parking lot, make sure that you park under a light and as close to the entrance as possible.
2.Hands-Free
Keeping your hands-free doesn’t only apply to driving. No matter where you are going, be sure that your hands are empty. This means that if you have a ton of books to carry, put them in a messenger bag or a backpack, and sling the bag over your shoulder. You’re less likely to become a victim if your hands are swinging by your sides instead of carrying ten pounds of books and supplies.
3.ATMs
If you don’t have the option to use a drive-up ATM, make sure that you are taking your money out during the day. Use ATMs in well-lit areas and always look around the machine before you approach it. If you see anyone hanging around the area, skip that particular ATM and find another. After you’ve gotten your money, resist the urge to count it. Instead, stick it in your pocket and walk away. You can count your money and organize yourself once you are somewhere more secure.
4.Personal Defense Items
Whether you carry a taser, a bottle of mace or an ear-piercing whistle, you should have something with you to draw attention to and protect yourself. If you do choose to carry one of these items, make sure that it’s easily accessible and that you know how to use it. A can of mace will do you no good if it’s at the bottom of your bag and you have no idea how to use it properly. A self-defense expert can teach you how to use your tools safely and correctly.
5.Share Your Schedule
One of the best ways to ensure your safety is to make sure that at least one person always knows where you are. If you go to work, class or even to the library on a regular basis, let someone have your schedule. Get into the habit of at least texting that person when you get home. If you are assaulted or in an accident, you’ll stand a better chance of making it through your ordeal if a loved one is always aware of your whereabouts.
Your safety should be your primary concern. If you follow the five tips above, you’ll be sure to stay safe no matter if you attend a traditional college or are a distance learner. If you need more safety tips, talk to your college’s security office or your local police department; either of these agencies will be happy to offer you advice.
Chantel Leck is an avid blogger. If you’re interested in ensuring the safety of others, consider the various careers possible with a criminal justice degree. Several schools offer online criminal justice degrees, including University of Cincinnati and Boston University.
According to statistics from the Internal Revenue Service, a total of 148,390,000 tax returns were received last year. Visits to the IRS website have increased by over two percent, too. Despite the popularity of do-it-yourself programs such as Turbo Tax and Tax ACT, many Americans will ultimately decide that they need professional help, and many seek it for the first time while filing their return.
This is great news if you work in the accounting field. However, before you start taking on new clients as tax season approaches, it’s crucial to learn that you have the right to set expectations, and let clients go if things aren’t working out. Read on for two suggestions that can help you manage clients when you work as an accountant, but can easily apply to any service industry.
Be Careful About Promising Too Much
It’s natural to want a client to see you as motivated and willing to finish a job. However, as a service provider, it’s also up to you to set expectations that are in accordance with your rates and ability levels.
In many cases, it’s not as much about about having the necessary skills as setting aside enough time in the day. For example, if a client wants rush preparation for a tax return, it might seem like an easy way to apply your knowledge carefully and efficiently.
However, tax returns, and any other type of complex paperwork can become increasingly intricate depending on a person’s specific situation. To keep your nerves intact during a client project, emphasize accuracy over speed. This will give you the time you need to do things thoroughly, without feeling that you’re crunched for time.
Similarly, be careful about making promises. In the tax industry, a client might become overly hopeful about getting a sizable return because they’re basing their expectations on past experience.
Whether you’re filling out tax forms, acting as a business advisor, or providing another particular service, remind your clients that you’ll use knowledge to the best of your abilities, but some things will simply remain out of your control.
Go With Your Instinct
Whenever you provide a service, it’s common for clients to want you to treat them as if you’re they’re your only concern in the world. They do deserve attention, but within reason. Set expectations at the beginning of your working relationship, and give details about any specific skills that you have.
If your customers are made aware of what you can offer from the beginning, they’ll be less likely to expect something that you can’t necessarily deliver to their expectations. Know your abilities, and promote them, but don’t become overly ambitious.
Finally, pay attention to your gut feeling. Often, it’ll be the first indicator that it’s time to end your relationship with clients who expect too much from you, or want you to bend over backwards to meet their needs. Ending a relationship is rarely easy, but if you feel strongly that it’s no longer a good fit, have a serious talk with your client.
No matter which industry you’re a part of, always keep things in perspective. It’s great to have a full roster of clients, but not if it puts you at risk for getting burned out. You have the right to be choosy. Good luck!
Tara Daines writes for finance blogs. If you’re interested in pursuing a degree in accounting but you don’t want to quit your day job, check out Online MS in Accounting options.
Author:
ebc
“The law already requires licensed gun dealers to run background checks, and over the last 14 years that’s kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun.”
— President Obama, remarks on gun violence, Jan. 16, 2013
Gun-control advocates frequently cite the claim that the Brady Law has kept 1.5 million of the “wrong people” from getting a firearm, but the number has come under attack from gun-industry supporters as a bogus figure.
We've spent several days trying to unravel this question, because it is complicated and the data are sometimes murky. There are certainly gaps in the information — and a surprising lack of prosecutorial follow-up, which has further muddied the picture.
Let’s examine what is happening here.
The Facts
The Brady law — named after Ronald Reagan’s press secretary James Brady, who was gravely wounded in an assassination attempt on the president — requires federally licensed firearms sellers to check whether a purchaser is prohibited from owning a gun because of a criminal history. Generally, this is done through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) through either the FBI or state agencies.
To keep things simple, we will focus on the FBI, using a report on the 2010 data by Ronald J. Frandsen of the Regional Justice Information Service.
About 99 percent of people who apply to buy a firearm are quickly cleared. But about 1 to 2 percent are denied, mainly because the records show that he or she has a felony indictment or conviction. The data also show that about 5 percent successfully appeal their denials.
Applications: 6,037,394
FBI denials: 72,659 (1.2 percent)
Appeals 16,513 (22.7 percent)
Successful appeals 3,491 (4.77 percent of denials)
The main reason listed for a denial is a felony conviction or indictment. Here are some of the key reasons:
Felony: 34,459 (47.4 percent)
Fugitive: 13,862 (19.1 percent)
State law prohibition: 7,666 (10.6 percent)
Drug use/addiction: 6,971 (9.6 percent)
But here is where it gets complicated. After a review by an arm of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), only a tiny percentage of the cases are actually referred to ATF field divisions for possible referral to prosecutors. Here are the data for 2010 concerning FBI denials.
FBI denials referred to ATF: 76,142
Referred to field: 4,732 (6.2 percent)
Not referred to field: 68,209 (89.6 percent)
Overturned: 3,163 (4.2 percent)
At first glance, these numbers seemed astonishing. In other words, another 4 percent of initial denials were found to be wrong — and 9 out of ten were not deemed worthy of further investigation.
Then, virtually all of these cases were declined by ATF field offices. Here are some of the key reasons, with essentially one-quarter being a case of mistaken denial — even after weeks of investigation.
No proprietorial merit: 1,661
Federal/state guidelines not met: 1,092
Not a prohibited person: 480
Closed by supervisor: 457
No potential or unfounded: 396
In the end, 62 cases were referred for prosecution, but most were declined by prosecutors or dismissed by the court. Out of the original 73,000 denials, there emerges just 13 guilty pleas.
Now, let’s back up a moment. As far as we can determine, the very low rate of referrals does not mean most of the denials were “false positives” or unwarranted. But it does mean that such cases are a low priority for government prosecutors.
“Cases are referred to ATF field divisions in accordance with guidelines established by the field offices and U.S. Attorneys who work within each division’s territory. The guidelines basically cover the types of cases that are considered to be high priority,” said Frandsen. “Because the strength of a particular case will be determined by further investigation, it is more accurate to say that a case is not referred to a field division because it is not considered to be a high priority within that division.”
The current guidelines are not public and Frandsen said that ATF has not provided him with updated guidelines since at least 2006. He noted that his reports have routinely noted that “cases involving restraining orders, domestic violence misdemeanors, non-immigrant aliens, violent felonies, warrants, and indictments are most often included in referral criteria,” and ATF has never asked for an edit of this sentence.
A Justice Department official says that many fugitive cases are handled at that moment by local authorities, who simply send police to the gun shop to pick up the violator, which is why few of those cases are referred. But the official acknowledged that many other cases are difficult to prosecute, because they are essentially about having to prove that someone knowingly lied on a form. The official said priority instead is placed on potentially violent criminals.
In 2000, the Government Accountability Office issued a report that examined the referral process. It said most referrals were based on criminal history records involving violent felonies, serious drug trafficking or domestic violence misdemeanors. The report cited a lack of clear guidelines from U.S. attorneys about cases they would accept, even after ATF agents had spent as long as six months preparing the case for referral.
A 2004 report by the Justice Department Inspector General did not find much improvement, with many U.S. attorneys still not providing guidelines. Moreover, it said such cases are hard to make:
We believe that the number of referrals and prosecutions is low because of the difficulty in obtaining convictions in NICS cases. These cases lack “jury appeal” for various reasons. The factors prohibiting someone from possessing a firearm may have been nonviolent or committed many years ago. The basis for the prohibition may have been noncriminal (e.g., a dishonorable discharge from the U.S. military). It is also difficult to prove that the prohibited person was aware of the prohibition and intentionally lied to the FFL [federally licensed dealer]. We were also told that in parts of the United States where hunting historically has been part of the regional culture, juries are reluctant to convict a person who attempted to purchase a hunting rifle.
Even so, the review found that the ATF still forwarded too many cases that lacked prosecutorial merit. It also found a significant number of denials (21 percent) to applicants who should not have been prohibited from purchasing a firearm.
“The special agents we spoke with generally commented that they do not consider the vast majority of NICS referral subjects a danger to the public because the prohibiting factors are often minor or based on incidents that occurred many years in the past,” the report added. The report cited, as examples of people prohibited from buying gun, someone who had stolen four hubcaps and a person convicted in 1941 of stealing a pig. Of the cases reviewed by the IG, 48 percent of the crimes had occurred more than five years earlier — and 13 percent at least 20 years previously.
This report is 10 years old, but, if anything, the trend in referrals has decreased over the past 10 years.
We could find no study that looked at the rate of “false positives,” though a 2003 NICS Operations report said the rate had increased by 2 percent when an updated system was implemented and it was working to reduce that. The report did not specify an actual false-positive rate.
The Pinocchio Test
So where does this leave us? Even accounting for all of the appeals and overturned referrals, it seems as if 1.5 million people over the last 14 years have been denied a firearm. Whether one believes these were all the “wrong people” is more a matter of opinion, but the president is free to make that assertion. Clearly, that many people were denied a firearm — and we have no way of knowing whether how many ever obtained one in the future.
Still, we are troubled by the lack of detailed data and recent reports that might clarify why so few cases end up being referred for prosecution — especially in light of the 2004 report that said ATF agents did not find many of these people dangerous. We also are troubled by the lack of data on false positives.
But, for the moment, that is not enough to rule this is an inaccurate fact. So, lieu of more evidence, this figure rates a rare Geppetto Checkmark.
