Actually, I don't see why I need to research this for you; you seem determined to hold onto your beliefs whether they are correct or not. As for your comments.... that was debate? This is a pretty basic definition that probably predates the Magna Carta. American, Australian and Canadian law are all based on British law, adapting it as they saw fit, though it seems not much in this case.
The Arkansas case, while they found her not guilty, went through the definition of public for purposes of the local drinking in public law in its explanation of why she wasn't guilty. I posted it for the defininition. But ok: http://www.toolkit.cch.com/pops/P98_05_5200_MI.asp http://makeashorterlink.com/?J1EA23025 www.elaw.org/resources/text.asp?ID=1222&lang=es http://makeashorterlink.com/?N1AA13025 Having said which, I am not interested in debating the shoulds of the situation, not this morning anyway. Have a good day. Dana Heald, Tim writes: > It defined public, not public property. You have to remember we are talking > about real property. Real estate. Land. Who decides what' is then public > and private land, don't we have some protections against government > intrusion on private property? Should a restaurant be considered public or > private property? Not even is it, but should it? > > Additionally, do you have nothing to say about the comments I made in > response to your links? Geez, where has debate gone? > > Timothy Heald > Information Systems Specialist > Overseas Security Advisory Council > U.S. Department of State > 571.345.2235 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:11 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: woo hoo > > > If the three links I sent yesterday don't suit you, try the one Nick sent. > If that doesn't please you either, I don't know what to say. > > Dana > > > > > "To your other points, I think you will find that a public place is > > > defined > > > in law as one that is frequented by the general public and thus a public > > > place would include streets, grocery stores, restaurants and some office > > > buildings." > > > > > > Phillip Morris says it supports some regulation on public smoking, > that's > > > great I have no problem with that. I have a problem with people > defining > > > private property as public. > > > > > > Please do at your convenience. > > > > > > Timothy Heald > > > Information Systems Specialist > > > Overseas Security Advisory Council > > > U.S. Department of State > > > 571.345.2235 > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
