It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Selling Biscuits And Gravy Will Get You Arrested

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Alaskan Man
 


I pick the right no the left.

Damn it!





posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

I love the US.

In Canada this would never happen.

We have laws called entrapment. This means that the cops can't set you up to bust you , they actually have to catch you in the act.

I see this all the time on COPS and other shows. It really crazy.

For example, cops dress up like hookers and offer themselves to guys driving by. As soon as the guy lets her in the van and she tricks him into saying how much for sex they arrest him. Unbelievable.

You guys are doomed down there.

Dooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmed!



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Well talk about a waste of time and money, to investigate a delivery person, who was not even the one doing the selling, but delivering the product to another person. And I can imagine that as long as the people who are eating such knows that the food is made in a home kitchen, then they are accepting some of the risks that go along with such.
I believe the person who mentioned about bake sales and cake walks hit it on the head, are they next?



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
I guess the next time the Girl Scouts come by selling cookies I should perform a citizens arrest.

I'll have my taser handy in case they resist arrest.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
i`ll take any street vendor over any regulated fastfood like McD any day. much of their stuff along with processed sh*t on the shelves of the supermarkets stay fresh for incredibly long amount of time. it only goes to show that even bacteria think the sh*t their food is laden with, (like MSG for example) is just outright disgusting. what makes humans think it`s good for them?

it`s like eating something natural right off the kitchen garden, but unwashed vs eating something germ-free, but contaminated with heavy dose of radiation. (exaggeration of course, but you get the idea)



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by Janky Red

Do you not recognize that the same document gives the state the power to create laws and enforce them?



Georgia state constitution:

Paragraph X. Bill of attainder; ex post facto laws; and retroactive laws. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or laws impairing the obligation of contract or making irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities shall be passed.

Paragraph V. Specific limitations. (c) The General Assembly shall not have the power to authorize any

contract or agreement
which may have the effect of or which is intended to have the effect of defeating or lessening competition, or encouraging a monopoly, which are hereby declared to be unlawful and void.




But I don't need the state constitution to tell me that people have an inherent right to transact without state interference.

[edit on 4-1-2010 by mnemeth1]


Paragraph X -

and

V

This fellow did NOT enter into contract with the state, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN A FOOD LICENSE and if he did he would have been subject two paragraph II and this would be a non issue, he would be in business and making his money and biscuits.




Georgia Food Act (section 26-2-25) "it shall be unlawful for any persom to operate a food sales establishment without having first obtained a license from the commissioner"


www.foodscience.caes.uga.edu...


Here folks

no need been determined



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by abecedarian
@ about 3:47

"Let's bust that guy for biscuits and gravy. That's a gateway drug you know. That usually leads to a fried porkchop or something."



On the other hand... operating without a business license and likely no health permit is illegal.

[edit on 1/4/2010 by abecedarian]


Actually it is NOT. If you have family and friends over and they eat at your place and give you gifts, you are trading one thing for another, COMMERCE, is not present.

Free TRADE, trade is the key word. He was trading his homemade goods for remuneration. His labor is worth something. His time and talent is worth something, NONE OF THIS can be taxed. A Corporation however, EMPLOYS others to manufacture the goods and these are generally sold at a higher cost FOR PROFIT. Health is HIS responsibility and NOT the States.

I could explain the whole economic system here but I know many will understand. It is the few who do not that are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

ALSO. cops are nothing more than corporate security guards, they have to file an oath of office within 15 days of being hired, if they do not, THEY ARE COMMITING A FEDERAL FELONY, impersonating an officer. I can see by the video, there is entrapment, and deciet. This guy could get off easy and make a huge sum for false arrest and willful neglect or dereliction of duty. The Sheriff is the ONLY true law enforcement official.

This is retarded and just goes to show the communist nature of the police force and the mentality of this sad country.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by daddio

Originally posted by abecedarian
@ about 3:47

"Let's bust that guy for biscuits and gravy. That's a gateway drug you know. That usually leads to a fried porkchop or something."



On the other hand... operating without a business license and likely no health permit is illegal.

[edit on 1/4/2010 by abecedarian]


Actually it is NOT. If you have family and friends over and they eat at your place and give you gifts, you are trading one thing for another, COMMERCE, is not present.

Free TRADE, trade is the key word. He was trading his homemade goods for remuneration. His labor is worth something. His time and talent is worth something, NONE OF THIS can be taxed. A Corporation however, EMPLOYS others to manufacture the goods and these are generally sold at a higher cost FOR PROFIT. Health is HIS responsibility and NOT the States.

I could explain the whole economic system here but I know many will understand. It is the few who do not that are part of the problem and not part of the solution.

ALSO. cops are nothing more than corporate security guards, they have to file an oath of office within 15 days of being hired, if they do not, THEY ARE COMMITING A FEDERAL FELONY, impersonating an officer. I can see by the video, there is entrapment, and deciet. This guy could get off easy and make a huge sum for false arrest and willful neglect or dereliction of duty. The Sheriff is the ONLY true law enforcement official.

This is retarded and just goes to show the communist nature of the police force and the mentality of this sad country.


Are we talking about the law or philosophy, ideology?

If we are talking law, it was ENFORCED - under STATE statute mentioned above.

While I think people should have more freedom to make a small living unfettered
I also think this man could have taken the time to do what ALL the other restaurants
and catering services have in his city. HE broke the law, key word LAW, If I drunk 10 jack and cokes, then hop in my car #@!# hammered, it would be my fault that I got pinched. I damn well knew what I was doing and I am not going to be a little bitch
when I get busted.

This guy should be a man,, pay his fine and go into politics, make an attempt to change the law.

Take responsibility- this guy should, pony up, we all have to do it if we go in his line of work. Why should he be special?



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Yeah... He probably got arrested because you need a license to sell food



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Since the maximum penalty was $25, it does seem pretty weird to do a sting operation instead of just giving the person a ticket for what was an infraction.

The problem was not whether it was legal or not. It was that an Officer misused their authority in that way and wasted a large amount of tax payers money. Just arresting the man instead of issuing a citation was very wrong.

I love biscuits and gravy personally. I'd love to have some homemade stuff. Its probably lots safer than the commercially prepared foods. My own kitchen is much cleaner than a restaurants kitchen staffed by children who don't even wash their hands.

I've never gotten food poisoning or gotten sick from homemade food. I have gotten very sick from legally prepared foods sold in restaurants.



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janky Red
... pony up, we all have to do it if we go in his line of work. Why should he be special?


This one comes out a lot. Especially regarding tax evasion.

It's like all the little frogs in the warm water getting really pissed at the one who jumped out before it began to boil.

Rather than jump out with him all the frogs cry "it isnt fair, he should be boiling to death with us."



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   
This whole thread is just ridiculous. The people elected those who will enact laws as they see fit. You have a REPUBLIC, remember? Well, those people you elected have determined how to do things so that risk is minimized and problems are avoided. That is what they decided on your behalf, because you elected them and hired them to do just that.

If you wanted a different outcome, go and change it. Do what they did. Get elected and then use persuasion to convince your other elected co-workers, so that you can change things. The people elect those to run the show, and then they are silent or whispering about what they want.

Wake up folks! You never really had the freedom you thought you had. There have always been rulers ruling over you who did things you would not like.

Back in the founder's day men would be publicly humiliated, whipped, or even killed, right in the town square. I'd love to see what people said if Obama tried that. The founder's had slaves too. During Lincoln's time, states tried to get out of the U.S.A. and a bloody war was waged. In 1913 the Fed Reserve Act was launched, but before that, there were bank failures all the time and people lost everything. Study your history. There has NEVER been a time in the world that people had it any better than you have right now. If it wasn't one thing, it was another.

This guy selling food from his house broke the law... plain and simple. You don't like the law? WELL THEN, get off your lazy rear-end, get off of ATS, and get out there to change it. All you have to do is get a million signatures of other Americans who agree with you, and you can get an initiative on the ballot for voting. Then the entire state will vote and decide if they want to let people sell food from their homes. HAHAHA! Good Luck on that one.

What you people fail to realize is that in a democracy/republic, you only need a simple majority for things to occur. That means 51% of the people need to want something, and it will happen. That also means that 49% of you will be unhappy and want to bitch and moan. Well, guess what? With this issue and many others like it, you are in the 49% minority. I can assure you that MOST people WANT food regulations. Do you hear that? MOST want it, so the system is working just as planned. You can complain all you want that you didn't get your way, but the fact is, in the U.S.A there used to be lots of cases of food illness and poisoning, so people got angry and demanded that the government do something about it... and they did.

Don't forget... you are not alone on this planet, and it is a fact that MANY people don't agree with you. That is the downside of living on a highly-populated planet. It's not the government's fault, it's actually yours. Who told you to go and have all those babies after WWII? Did you think you could just go and populate the earth like that and there would be no ramifications? Silly humans.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by downisreallyup]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by downisreallyup
This whole thread is just ridiculous. The people elected those who will enact laws as they see fit. You have a REPUBLIC, remember? Well, those people you elected have determined how to do things so that risk is minimized and problems are avoided. That is what they decided on your behalf, because you elected them and hired them to do just that.

If you wanted a different outcome, go and change it. Do what they did. Get elected and then use persuasion to convince your other elected co-workers, so that you can change things. The people elect those to run the show, and then they are silent or whispering about what they want.

Wake up folks! You never really had the freedom you thought you had. There have always been rulers ruling over you who did things you would not like.

Back in the founder's day men would be publicly humiliated, whipped, or even killed, right in the town square. I'd love to see what people said if Obama tried that. The founder's had slaves too. During Lincoln's time, states tried to get out of the U.S.A. and a bloody war was waged. In 1913 the Fed Reserve Act was launched, but before that, there were bank failures all the time and people lost everything. Study your history. There has NEVER been a time in the world that people had it any better than you have right now. If it wasn't one thing, it was another.

This guy selling food from his house broke the law... plain and simple. You don't like the law? WELL THEN, get off your lazy rear-end, get off of ATS, and get out there to change it. All you have to do is get a million signatures of other Americans who agree with you, and you can get an initiative on the ballot for voting. Then the entire state will vote and decide if they want to let people sell food from their homes. HAHAHA! Good Luck on that one.

What you people fail to realize is that in a democracy/republic, you only need a simple majority for things to occur. That means 51% of the people need to want something, and it will happen. That also means that 49% of you will be unhappy and want to bitch and moan. Well, guess what? With this issue and many others like it, you are in the 49% minority. I can assure you that MOST people WANT food regulations. Do you hear that? MOST want it, so the system is working just as planned. You can complain all you want that you didn't get your way, but the fact is, in the U.S.A there used to be lots of cases of food illness and poisoning, so people got angry and demanded that the government do something about it... and they did.

Don't forget... you are not alone on this planet, and it is a fact that MANY people don't agree with you. That is the downside of living on a highly-populated planet. It's not the government's fault, it's actually yours. Who told you to go and have all those babies after WWII? Did you think you could just go and populate the earth like that and there would be no ramifications? Silly humans.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by downisreallyup]


We have a constitutional republic, and the people doing the whipping were British agents. Don't forget the word "constitutional" in there. That's what prevents 51% from enslaving the other 49.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the biggest abolitionists. He couldn't free his slaves because, like property, he was obligated to keep them due to debt.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


So if you buy say a tainted burger from say I don't know maybe "Jack in the Box" and become ill (God Forbid by the way I wouldn't wish anyone ill)
and hire a lawyer to sue...who do you think comes out the better for it? Well the lawyer of course because most likely he is going to file a class action suit and settle before it ever gets to court which is exactly his intent then the Jack in the Box will turn around and sue the meat provider making more lawyers rich and then after the lawsuit money is divided up and you get ten grand for the loss of a child due to tainted meat (God Forbid again) the only people that come out ahead are A) Lawyers
B)Jack in the Box actually never pays out any money because of insurance
C) they get back money from meat provider after that lawsuit is settled between them with agreements of no wrong doing
D)Meat provider never suffers loss as they have insurance
Now who do you think suffers the most?
A)the family that loss a child
B)Consumers when they pay triple what a burger cost than before
C) Consumers when they double what meat cost
D) Investors (Consumers) that invested money in said insurance company that simply charges higher premiums to recoup the millions they paid Lawyers
Certainly we have Health Laws for good reason but how many stories have we seen about dirty restaurants? I have provided just a couple links below to illustrate my point but many more easy to find. Health Inspections are usually the domain of the States or even cities and we already know how they govern...how do you think they inspect the restaurants? Not very well as it cost money and they don't spend money where it needs to go instead they waste it on crap. Link provided to example below. Food Inspectors are too few and don't see a lot of money. they cannot find every problem even when they look for them but what the guys willing to take a litytle extra for a passing grade? Don't think it doesn't happen...Link provided below for an example. Lets face it these people were not doing bussiness as they should but the reaction is really whats its all about...they held a man that was not even the operator of the business and tried threats and lies. At the most it would have a $25 dollar fine and shut down. Somebody got mad that knew a policeman and they set out on a vendetta this is whats wrong. Money is the bottom line it talks walks and line the pockets of lawyers and politicians alike.


findarticles.com...

www.msnbc.msn.com...

www.associatedcontent.com...

www.kitv.com...

www.foodhaccp.com...



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJMSN
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


So if you buy say a tainted burger from say I don't know maybe "Jack in the Box" and become ill (God Forbid by the way I wouldn't wish anyone ill)
and hire a lawyer to sue...who do you think comes out the better for it?


Well considering that almost all fast-food chains get their meat from Beef Product, Inc. and those guys are putting terrible additives to the meat, I would recommend not eating at fast-food places either. If you really want to eat beef, I would go to a higher-class restaurant, or just get it from a place that grinds the beef right there and cook your own at home. Basically:

1) eating food from people's homes is dangerous if you don't know them and you have not inspected their kitchen and hygiene practices. If they have a license and get inspected that should reduce SOME of the danger. So, this is dangerous because NO inspection occurs.

Ammonia laden pink-slime in most U.S. ground beef

2) eating food from a fast-food restaurant is also dangerous because the FDA allows things to happen that should not happen. So, this is dangerous because INADEQUATE standards of practice and inspection are in place. This should still be better than NO inspection, unless the government wants to kill people off with tainted food, in which case it is just as dangerous (or more so) than the NO inspection situation.

3) the best bet is to buy beef from a reputable butcher or organic meat store that is inspected and rated to the highest level.

4) an even better bet is to raise the cows yourself and get them butchered when they are ready.


[edit on 6-1-2010 by downisreallyup]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Janky Red
... pony up, we all have to do it if we go in his line of work. Why should he be special?


This one comes out a lot. Especially regarding tax evasion.

It's like all the little frogs in the warm water getting really pissed at the one who jumped out before it began to boil.

Rather than jump out with him all the frogs cry "it isnt fair, he should be boiling to death with us."


So does the frog analogy...

I was just offering another way to frame this, my main argument was that this is fully in step with the US constitution, our REPUBLIC, meaning he was subject to state and local statutes.

However you and biscuit man can jump out for all I care, but you might fall in the fire, bust your head on the floor or get smashed by the angry chef.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Janky Red]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:39 AM
link   
------- MODS PLEAES DELECTE -----------


[edit on 6-1-2010 by Ceptor10]



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Any government or police that control the vast majority of the country would be an obvious threat...!!! But not here in the good ol' U S of A



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by downisreallyup
This whole thread is just ridiculous. The people elected those who will enact laws as they see fit. You have a REPUBLIC, remember? Well, those people you elected have determined how to do things so that risk is minimized and problems are avoided. That is what they decided on your behalf, because you elected them and hired them to do just that.

If you wanted a different outcome, go and change it. Do what they did. Get elected and then use persuasion to convince your other elected co-workers, so that you can change things. The people elect those to run the show, and then they are silent or whispering about what they want.

Wake up folks! You never really had the freedom you thought you had. There have always been rulers ruling over you who did things you would not like.

Back in the founder's day men would be publicly humiliated, whipped, or even killed, right in the town square. I'd love to see what people said if Obama tried that. The founder's had slaves too. During Lincoln's time, states tried to get out of the U.S.A. and a bloody war was waged. In 1913 the Fed Reserve Act was launched, but before that, there were bank failures all the time and people lost everything. Study your history. There has NEVER been a time in the world that people had it any better than you have right now. If it wasn't one thing, it was another.

This guy selling food from his house broke the law... plain and simple. You don't like the law? WELL THEN, get off your lazy rear-end, get off of ATS, and get out there to change it. All you have to do is get a million signatures of other Americans who agree with you, and you can get an initiative on the ballot for voting. Then the entire state will vote and decide if they want to let people sell food from their homes. HAHAHA! Good Luck on that one.

What you people fail to realize is that in a democracy/republic, you only need a simple majority for things to occur. That means 51% of the people need to want something, and it will happen. That also means that 49% of you will be unhappy and want to bitch and moan. Well, guess what? With this issue and many others like it, you are in the 49% minority. I can assure you that MOST people WANT food regulations. Do you hear that? MOST want it, so the system is working just as planned. You can complain all you want that you didn't get your way, but the fact is, in the U.S.A there used to be lots of cases of food illness and poisoning, so people got angry and demanded that the government do something about it... and they did.

Don't forget... you are not alone on this planet, and it is a fact that MANY people don't agree with you. That is the downside of living on a highly-populated planet. It's not the government's fault, it's actually yours. Who told you to go and have all those babies after WWII? Did you think you could just go and populate the earth like that and there would be no ramifications? Silly humans.



[edit on 5-1-2010 by downisreallyup]


We have a constitutional republic, and the people doing the whipping were British agents. Don't forget the word "constitutional" in there. That's what prevents 51% from enslaving the other 49.

Thomas Jefferson was one of the biggest abolitionists. He couldn't free his slaves because, like property, he was obligated to keep them due to debt.

[edit on 5-1-2010 by mnemeth1]


Yes deferring to state and local statutes is line with the constitution, which you keep ignoring. Then you liberally interoperate the constitution to fit your agenda...
If this man is being denied his constitutional rights he can filled suit, or you can fill suit on behalf of him. Currently the ONLY NATIONS IN THE WORLD WHO DO NOT HAVE
FOOD SAFETY REGULATIONS ARE THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES, is that your goal?



posted on Jan, 6 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Are we actually going back to the nanny state. Isn't that what we are talking about here. It wasn't very long ago that a person got food from what-ever source they could and they were glad to get it. People sold or gave food and the community was better for it. If no-one wanted the food or it made you ill, then both the giver and reciever were ill affected. People went into business because they wanted life to be better not worse. Word of mouth advertising made you or broke you.

Didn't regulation come from one business trying to gain an advantage over his competetors, not by creating a better product, but by creating a dis-advantage for for his competetion.

I guess we can now write a new script for "Gunsmoke", where Marshal Matt Dillon went on the trail of the evil Hershey Squirt bandit by following the terrible smell back to his evil kitchen hide-out. And thuss Dodge City and Miss. Kitty were safe once again from running to the outhouse in the cold cruel Kansas country side.

And thus with regulation came the invention of the Mini Skirt.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join