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.
Its not a fine. Its a civil debt. Its not owed to the State, its owed to the aggrieved party(s). Your mugging analogy suggests a complete lack of understanding of how the legal system works. If the defendant doesn't pay, the plaintiffs can chase them for their assets, levy bank accounts, garnish wages, foreclose on real property, but they have no right to resort to violence or imprisonment.
If the plaintiffs sent "men with guns" as you suggest in your scenario, the plaintiffs would be committing a crime (for which they could be imprisoned) and would be subject to civil damages payable to the defendant.
I think you've watched too many mob movies.
And you've never inspected the inside of a business for code violations.
Failure to pay State-imposed fines can lead to imprisonment. Armed agents of the State will escort you to jail if you fail to pay your fines.
Kidnapping is violent.
I disagree with your premise. It's kind of like family court. A judge can order a defendant or plaintiff to pay his arrears, however it would take more court time ($$$) to finally jail him.
I disagree with your premise. It's kind of like family court. A judge can order a defendant or plaintiff to pay his arrears, however it would take more court time ($$$) to finally jail him.
So you're an advocate of "reasonable shakedowns" at gunpoint?
Kind of creepy if ya ask me but whatever floats your boat.
$210 State-imposed fine for not posting Subpart C of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 where employees can see it.
I do this for living so we can keep going if you'd like cuz this stuff runs deep, yo.
You do this stuff for a living? Then you should probably go find a new job.
First, the couple in question won an award under the Oregon State law, not the Federal statute (because sexual orientation is not a protected class under the Federal regs), so the Civil Rights Act doesn't even apply.
Second, I don't know to which "subpart C" you are referring, but I would guess somewhere in Title VII based on your mention of employees. Title VII has no application to a business choosing whether or not to sell to classes of customers. Ergo, even if the Civil Rights Act applied (it doesn't), the subsection you cited does not.
Third, the particular subsection you cite (in situations in which it does apply, e.g, not here) is a fine or not posting the mandatory Title VII notice to employees. It does not regulate employer-employee conduct any more than a "Fire Exit" sign does - which incidentally is a good analogy because you will get fined for failing to post that too.
The award here was Civil in nature and in favor of individual Plaintiffs, not a State-imposed fine.
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.
