peteysweetusername

peteysweetusername t1_jdwn6ky wrote

It would help to know your wills and your wonts. For example as a prison guard you’ll make good money ($75k) and get a pension after 20 years but you may not want to do that kind of work. I know law enforcement is looking for women for all roles not just police so think trial court officers too.

You could make $100/hr as an underwater welder but that means welding and diving experience. But that’s got a death rate of like one out of seven people.

Are you looking for an office type job, inside/outside work, do you have a clean driving record for a trucking job?

2

peteysweetusername t1_jdhqx0r wrote

Cvs - do you want to opt in for advertising spam? Yes, click this screen. No? Well you’re already opted in but if you want to opt out call our call center in India, wait on hold for 15 minutes, and struggle to communicate opting out to someone who barely speaks English.

I don’t know why this hasn’t been implemented years ago. Congress used to make laws forbidding spam calls at certain times and different sound levels during commercials

1

peteysweetusername t1_jdde132 wrote

Unfortunately probably sooner. If you get sentenced federally for a year or less you serve the full time. Anything beyond a year, you can get “discounts.” So for good behavior, 54 days will be wiped off your sentence so it’s really like 10 months. Not sure if there’s any other discounts you can get but

3

peteysweetusername t1_jc29k61 wrote

Legally yes but many companies don’t want litigation in cases where a former employee can sue for slander. Most companies have policies that will say position held at termination and how long you were employed. Some will say eligible or not eligible for rehire but there are many reasons you may not be eligible. I’m assuming you’re asking this question because of a firing.

Large companies outsource these referrals to a third party company called the work number. This is considered a credit bureau for legal purposes and you can request a copy of your file

1

peteysweetusername t1_j7ufnen wrote

You should research “motel caswell” in Tewksbury. It closed years ago and is now a retail strip but the government tried to take the property through civil forfeiture. There were 14 drug related arrests at the property during a time where he rented 200,000 rooms. I used to live up there and there was more drug activity at a McDonald’s down the street but the government didn’t go after that corporate property.

The owner ended up having to front $100,000 in legal fees before a non profit ended up taking the case. The judge ended up ruling in caswells favor after years of stress and money spent.

This is the problem with civil forfeiture because you need to prove your innocence against the government which has unlimited resources compared to a private citizen. The government just has to make an accusation.

2

peteysweetusername t1_ivq6dsu wrote

What I meant was more of a take on the legislature. These ballot votes show where the public at large thinks and they overwhelmingly supported question 2. In my book, with that kind of support, the legislature should have easily passed this legislation rather than having to collect tens of thousands of signatures. They did vote to pass questions that ultimately lot are being decided on a 55/45 margin. The difference to me is obviously lobbyist influence

11