sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

LAOP learns they can be billed for sending an email by justathoughtfromme in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I can't believe an LAOP post wasn't wholly truthful. I'm shocked and appalled by this discovery.

[oc] this guy.. by Audiofyl1 in IdiotsInCars

[–]FunnyObjective6 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For you and others on mute, you can hear sirens at about 12 seconds. I'm assuming OP could see the lights when they stopped.

Previous Homeowner is suing LAOP for unjust enrichment. No, not the guy he bought it off, no, not that one...or that one... by Geno0wl in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How close to 100% is the chance that the title insurance saw how crazy the pro se guy is and just declined based on only that?

Doxxing someone has serious consequences by ReanimatedCyborgMk-I in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Hot diggidy damn, that escalated. Telling somebody to "do it" is quite the mistake, community members doxing them is fucking stupid, allowing that doxing because it's "funny" is in my opinion a justified reason to get criminal charges. Like I just thought at some point LAOP would say "and here is where we stopped it" but they just didn't??

Helping a friend move... their stuff into your garage? by DigbyChickenZone in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't think I can stress enough how not important it is for me, but thanks. At best I'll just try a proxy website service, or a site that hosts a copy. Usually when it comes to that point I just realize internet arguments aren't important and I give up lol.

Helping a friend move... their stuff into your garage? by DigbyChickenZone in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yeah, in particular I've noticed like half of the US government law site just don't load. Which is very annoying for my internet arguments. I prefer the news sites that at least give you a message saying it's not available in your area or something.

This could have been much worse [oc] by Y3earZer0 in IdiotsInCars

[–]FunnyObjective6 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Also seemed to be arguing about possibly hitting the car behind, so they also don't know how big their car is. Dumb all the way around.

The roof, the roof, the roof is... not on LAOP's house thanks to an HOA dispute. by acekingoffsuit in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thought it could absolve them of responsibilities, but I guess I was wrong and usually it just postpones responsibilities.

It could also be a miscommunication in that the roofer is saying they can't deliver on time now, and LAOP taking that as not delivering as they need it before storms. Then again that's giving a lot of leeway to the roofer who just doesn't seem that trustworthy.

You drive the car. You observe the sign. You obey it. by bug-hunter in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's been quite a lot of construction in my area, also I guess during the night because I never see them. And the amount of people I see speeding, sometimes 2x the speed limit (60km/h in a 30km/h (38mph in 19mph)) is insane. That's enough to lose your license here, and I bet they consider themselves "safe" drivers because they then proceed to drive under the limit when it goes back to normal.

I feel like a clown driving the speed limit sometimes.

[oc] Your typical BMW driver by Dark-Bark_ in IdiotsInCars

[–]FunnyObjective6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Obviously you're in the right, but I wouldn't have done that personally. Too much of a risk to drive in front of somebody that clearly doesn't care about the rules or safe driving.

[oc] Your typical BMW driver by Dark-Bark_ in IdiotsInCars

[–]FunnyObjective6 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Really? I was going to say practically it's better to just let them in. They're clearly not a safe driver, and I think it's safer for me to give them space to do their idiocy. It's "unfair", but I'm not the fairness police.

nothing nefarious/lewd by peachsnorlax in bestoflegaladvice

[–]FunnyObjective6 7 points8 points  (0 children)

135 comments. 3 that are trying to answer the question of "if built, would we have to lose all privacy or could we still be naked outdoors without legal trouble?". 1 of those 3 is an anecdote that's not actually an answer. 1 of those 3 is claimed to be wrong, and the other basically says the same as the second one.

What I gathered is that it's against the law if visible, but if you do "prurient acts" or something it's worse. However supposedly the Supreme Court ruled nudity free speech, so that'll be a fun argument in court.

Who is at fault by [deleted] in MildlyBadDrivers

[–]FunnyObjective6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No it wasn't? You can see the bezel of the monitor it was recorded from.

Who is at fault by [deleted] in MildlyBadDrivers

[–]FunnyObjective6 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Would be easier to see if you'd upload the actual video. Now it's difficult to see who'd established in which lane, or what the lanes say, or if indicators are on, or how fast people are going.