Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Reading this "poor little old lady's" blog and rants about fornication leads me to believe that she would have NO PROBLEM with abortion providers being killed. So she was pushed. Big deal.
you disregard the facts the case that was made about the number of ambulances was the key to what she was filming not the person going into the ambulance
If it was about the number of ambulances, then after she took video of the ambulance outside the clinic, why did she continue to record, waiting for the patient to be brought out. Why the nasty subtitles all over the video? Why does she say it was a botched abortion, when she doesn't know ANYTHING about the patient?
Who is talking about wiretapping? The law concerns two people having a conversation. Both have to agree to being audiotaped, unless in circumstances such as the police interviewing someone who is suspected of driving while intoxicated but even then there are regulations about how and where the conversation has to occur.
Delaware is one of the most stringent states when it comes to privacy.
The law regarding audio taping is the wiretap law. There is a federal law and state laws, but it doesn't apply to videotaping unless the camera equipment was hidden. The was a case a few years ago that had a cop arresting a motorcyclist on federal wiretapping charges for videotaping the cop. That case was thrown out.
The law regarding audio taping is the wiretap law. There is a federal law and state laws, but it doesn't apply to videotaping unless the camera equipment was hidden. The was a case a few years ago that had a cop arresting a motorcyclist on federal wiretapping charges for videotaping the cop. That case was thrown out.
Delaware is a two-party consent state when it comes to audiotape.
There are also special laws regarding surveilling the police, but I'm not familiar with Delaware's laws regarding that.
so? There are many who get prescription drugs, not on their plans, because they are offered for free elsewhere or they are not discounted. There is no law that says that our drugs have to be claimed against our insurance.
sorry, I don't see how she is in the wrong, if her uptight parents would pitch a fit that she was getting birth control. And you don't know if the BC was going to be used for other medical issues (ovarian cysts for example).
If I was a parent, and my teenage daughter was looking to get birth control, I wouldn't be angry that she is taking responsibility for her life. A little put off, that she MAY be having sex, but at least she's being responsible.
None of this matters. The whole point of PP, as its supporters so proudly proclaim, is that it's helping people get services they would not otherwise be able to afford or have access to due to location. If the girl has insurance, and is LYING to get free stuff courtesy of the taxpayer, that is WRONG. And this is why conservatives do not like welfare type programs that are readily available b/c lying like this is rampant and takes advantage of anyone paying income taxes.
Grandma was provoking and filming a patient being taken in an ambulance WITHOUT HER PERMISSION. This is disgusting. She did not know WHY she was being taken. She was just making assumptions. She got what she deserved. Just because she's old doesn't mean she gets to violate people like that. Too bad she didn't hit her harder.
This line of thinking is so juvenile. You're supporting violence whenever a person feels like punching someone.
All you guys are so anti-war and whatnot but then you have opinions such as this. More hypocrisy from the left.
Yeah, right there on the streets of Wilmington. Get real, zombie.
No, it wasn't paid for by the taxpayer if she didn't have medicaid. She would have had to pay on a sliding scale fee structure. PP is NOT a government agency; it is private non-profit.
What do you think a sliding scale is? The tab has to be picked up somewhere. And since PP receives any gov't funds whatsoever, the taxpayer is ultimately on the hook.
If the girl has insurance, and is LYING to get free stuff courtesy of the taxpayer, that is WRONG.
According to him, she was covered under her parents' insurance. So what? I don't have to go to a hospital or clinic and say that I am. If I don't want my insurance to cover anything, there is NO LAW that says I have to claim anything under my insurance.
Please point out the exact law that says I must use my insurance for every medical procedure I do or prescription drug I take.
We have a third hand story, from an anonymous person, who says his friend said that she had no insurance and got BC for free. There is no evidence that this actually occurred, and there are many possibilities that as to why. He only saw the ONE day that he went with her. Free samples, payment plans arranged, she paid while he was not looking, are all valid reasons for her getting BC; instead he went for "must have been paid by tax money" reasoning.
We don't have her side of the story, so we can't put any weight into his claims.
Anonymous? My name, picture, and address are available in my profile. I know you're too coward to post so people can identify you but that doesn't apply to me.
As for your statement, like I said over and over, she TOLD me that's what she was doing. I didn't jump to any conclusions from seeing her to do it one time.
According to him, she was covered under her parents' insurance. So what? I don't have to go to a hospital or clinic and say that I am. If I don't want my insurance to cover anything, there is NO LAW that says I have to claim anything under my insurance.
Please point out the exact law that says I must use my insurance for every medical procedure I do or prescription drug I take.
We have a third hand story, from an anonymous person, who says his friend said that she had no insurance and got BC for free. There is no evidence that this actually occurred, and there are many possibilities that as to why. He only saw the ONE day that he went with her. Free samples, payment plans arranged, she paid while he was not looking, are all valid reasons for her getting BC; instead he went for "must have been paid by tax money" reasoning.
We don't have her side of the story, so we can't put any weight into his claims.
After work, I'm picking up three prescriptions and not claiming them against my health insurance. Pharmacy cost without insurance is better than the "contracted rate" with insurance. You don't have to claim every little thing against insurance.
And we're to take, at face value, the word of somebody who cries like a mewling kitten about "anonymous posters lying about their identities insinuating that I'm not being truthful" regarding something that he, himself, is not even 100% positive on. Sorry, not sorry, but that's like taking at face value when people cry that they saw food stamp benefits being used to buy beer. The facts aren't in his favor.
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 03-20-2013 at 03:09 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
