Surprised I read about the opinion of some politicians and even lawyers about the need for regulation and frame not contained in any criminal activity. .
believe that we are facing a figure clearly tort offense under Penal Code Article 149 bis in fine (coercive threat), with imprisonment from 2 to 4 years, requiring another by use of threats to act against their will (the brevity of the medium prevents me elaborate on this issue.)
is clear example that these "cuidacoches" directly or indirectly threaten announcing certain damage, and the car would have to take care of themselves. It was also intended as if we just create a new tax to the regulation of this activity. Tolerate until flat-rate charge! For those who believe that not a crime, I propose that we change variables to see if the opinion continues: Suppose you leave your home to work and intercepts a subject that offers a modest sum to take care of your family while you are away. What do you think? Then regulate the custom from the "cuidafamilias" why not? And Victoria Ocampo said: "If you do not have the courage to live as we think it ends up thinking as it is lived."
change things that are wrong, do not think that life is good or properly by the mere fact that it's done. The conduct of the tort cuidacoches is threatening and antisocial.
I would comment on the thought of a colleague, Dr. Boasso, who published a letter on 12-02-2010 in the newspaper La Capital. It is my intention to make a trialist or philosophical analysis of the alleged statutory rule to Ciudacoches, but if you analyze the legal and social nature. I note that Mr. Boasso is the concept of custom which takes place in society, with repetition, generality, convinced that responds to a legal obligation, we must regulate it. Do not agree at all this thinking.
There are several questions left unanswered in the air, for example:
1) Who enviste Ciudacoches of the power to take care of the property of another? (Is the State?)
2) In case of damage cash in the car, who replied civilly? (The Ciudacoches or the State acknowledged at her figure, gave him authority, and regulated.), The ciudacoches is work?, In which case yes, where the legal positions within the plexus labor policy?,
3) One child, can be Ciudacoches?, if not, why not?.
4) Does the ciudacoches police power to stop the killer of a car?, If not, why not?, If he would be responsible for that vehicle. If positive: My God!
5) Although the victim knows all ciudacoches data, name, etc, to file the complaint against him, as evidenced by the damage? If there is ever exactly the same when the car's owner is near the road. It is an evil and impossible to test production, test how the causal link between the damage and not to pay ciudacoches enraged by his "voluntary gratuity "?.... And so we have many issues arising from or to regulate or standardize a activity which, to my mind, is criminal.
But the most important question is: Whose must look after the car the ciudacoches?, because if I remember is the state that should ensure compulsory and only for the life and heritage administrators. Enough hypocrisy, Ciudacoches need a decent, normal, wage, regulated and in law, social benefits and pension for him and his family. More work is needed legal and real, and less demagoguery. Visit this vicnulo
the newspaper La Razon to learn more about the law that would prohibit. Http://www.larazon.com.ar/notas/2010/02/01/02131328.html
0 comments:
Post a Comment