Timothy Nelson5 said:It’s not really news, though; maybe people are just a bit more aware of their rights these days.
The collectors never really had any real authority to begin with, and they usually backed off if they ran into a homeowner who actually knew the law. Personally, over the last 15 years or so, I’ve had maybe six or seven verbal standoffs where the collector just tucked tail and left, without even bothering to file a report against me.
I have this feeling that lately, they might have even gone through some kind of training run by their legal department about what they can and can't do, and how to handle different scenarios.
And I’m pretty sure most of them have realized it's much smarter to go find some other naive victim rather than end up in court arguing with someone who knows how to fight back.
They weren't allowed to enter a private residence before either, but by introducing the concept of a "responsible party" into the penal code, it seems that CBS collectors have become significantly more liable under criminal law lately.
So, it isn't just about entering a home anymore; there are also various threats, manipulative persuasion techniques involving lies, spying, or the unauthorized collection of personal data, and so on.
All of that falls under exceeding the limits of their authority, which is quite clearly detailed in Article 291.
I suppose I could offer a slightly more extensive interpretation of the regulations here...
We find ourselves in a situation where some low-level agent from CBS shows up at the door and attempts to enter someone's home using various different methods. The spectrum of these tactics is actually quite broad, ranging from the more subtle approaches—which essentially involve deception and threats regarding various citations if you don't grant them entry...
Then there are the somewhat more primitive methods, such as entering an unlocked residence or perhaps wedging a foot in the doorway with the specific intention of forcing their way inside.
Now, looking closely, there have been some minor amendments to the Penal Code that quite significantly impact those bureaucrats over at CBS.
That small change involves the concept of a "responsible person." Here is how the U.S. legal framework might define such a role:
"(6) A responsible person is a natural person who manages the affairs of a legal entity or is explicitly or effectively entrusted with performing duties within the scope of operations of a legal entity, a government body, or a local or regional government unit."
CBS functions as a legal entity with public authorities, and their collection agents are considered responsible persons entrusted with tasks within that entity's jurisdiction—specifically, monitoring those obligated to pay fees and managing those who have deregistered receivers. They even carry their own identification cards. This constitutes the exercise of public authority.
So, when we examine their entry into homes or business premises, and their failure to withdraw upon request, we are looking at a qualified form of a criminal offense that is prosecuted ex officio, rather than by motion, as was the case under the previous system.
Violation of the sanctity of the home and business premises
Section 141.
(1) Whoever unauthorizedly enters another's home, business premises, or a closed or enclosed space belonging to said home or business premises, or fails to depart therefrom upon the request of an authorized person, shall be punished by imprisonment for up to one year.
(2) If the criminal offense described in paragraph 1 of this section is committed by a public official in the performance of their duties or a responsible person in the performance of public authority, they shall be punished by imprisonment for up to three years.
(3) The criminal offense described in paragraph 1 of this section is prosecuted upon motion.
Similarly, there are various threats and persuasion techniques used by collectors, suggesting that one must let them in or face a citation and subsequent wage garnishment in the coming months.
Bluffing with various detection devices, or claiming that "neighbors reported you"—these are all forms of deception and unlawful behavior.
Here is what the law dictates regarding such matters:
Abuse of position and authority
Section 291.
(1) A public or responsible person who exploits their position or authority, exceeds the limits of their authority, or fails to perform their duty, thereby obtaining a benefit for themselves or another person or causing harm to another,, shall be punished by imprisonment from six months to five years.
Harm can be both material and non-material. In this context, it includes violations of privacy, reputation, or emotional distress (more specifically, harassment).
Actual harm does not necessarily need to occur; for this specific offense, the attempt itself is punishable because the penalty allows for up to 5 years in prison.
Attempt
Section 34.
(1) Whoever, with the intent to commit a criminal offense, undertakes an action that immediately precedes the realization of the essence of the crime in terms of space and time, shall be punished for an attempt if the crime carries a penalty of five years or more imprisonment, or if the law explicitly provides for punishment of an attempt.
So, I suppose it is possible to legally hold these arrogant CBS collectors accountable after all. 👍
wanderingcanyon61 said:I find pedophiles to be an utterly repulsive group of people. I suppose I recognize that this is a psychological disorder, and perhaps they feel unable to control their impulses or what attracts them. But, I guess if that truly is the case—if one is suffering from such an affliction—then one ought to simply contain it and live with that burden privately. One really shouldn't attempt to manifest those urges by harming children. It just isn't acceptable.
In my view, maintaining a registry for sex offenders is quite necessary, much like the systems used in the USA.
Here in America, the identities of actual predators often remain hidden, while the news media seems more interested in publishing the private details of someone who was merely caught with a small amount of marijuana. 👎
steelorca5 said:I suppose I am just seeing this now, which is quite interesting 🍿
I guess it might not matter much what people think about attacking some pathetic old men with low IBM scores, because they probably aren't even central to the whole situation or the broader struggle. One could argue that the truly dangerous predators and those producing illicit material in this country are people you would likely never encounter, let alone deal with directly.
They certainly exist, ranging from elderly individuals all the way down to people my own age....
It seems to me that manipulation is a gradual process, occurring step by step. 😁
Furthermore, I suspect that targeting those individuals isn't the sole objective of the association. There is also a focus on providing aid and protection to victims, which I believe is a far more significant and weighty goal than simply calling out pedophiles.
Once the association is officially established, we will perhaps see how many people are actually willing to step up and help those in need.
wanderingcanyon61 said:I suppose I would really love to see someone emerge who actually possesses the courage to stand up to true criminals. I am not referring to those petty small-timers who might swipe a few dollars from a convenience store or get into a scrap over some cheap drugs. What I am truly wondering about is why nobody seems to have the backbone to challenge the actual kingpins holding high-ranking positions—the ones who rig public contracts and embezzle millions of dollars without even blinking an eye. Unfortunately, these individuals are often respected members of our society, and instead of being challenged, people actually vote them into office. On top of that, the courts tend to drag their cases out for years, and it seems like no one ever actually faces any consequences. How one might go about solving such a problem is a difficult question, I guess. 😳
wanderingcanyon61 said:I simply cannot get behind a system where an individual can take someone else's money, refuse to ever pay it back, claim ownership of those funds, and then essentially resort to force against the person who is just trying to legally reclaim what belongs to them.
I suppose people like that aren't any better than common thieves or the very types of individuals you all claim to be fighting against.
EDIT: I might suggest that in situations like these, perhaps you and your brother could just give your own money to these people so they don't end up homeless. Maybe just set aside $100,000 to $200,000 for each person, and then the problem would be solved.👍
That may be true, but I don't think it's really a solution to evict someone or put their house up for auction just because they owe $2,000.
Honestly, it just doesn't seem right.
And what about the children or the vulnerable people left out on the streets? 🤔
I doubt anyone is actually going to step up and help you at the end of the day.
bluebadger112 As stated by: I suppose one could imagine trying to play games with someone far more powerful than oneself. Honestly, if you look at certain areas in the Midwest, there are criminals there who are significantly more depraved than any notorious offender you might find in the USA; I won't go naming names specifically, though I suspect anyone would find them easy enough to recall. Perhaps it would be more effective to focus your attention on them instead? 🍿
I suppose I could mention that the inmates you’re referring to would likely take great pleasure in giving those kinds of pedophiles a very rough time once they find themselves behind bars.
I suppose I don't particularly care if someone chooses to deal drugs, steal, or engage in robbery and similar activities.
It seems to me that they will likely publish stories like these in the newspapers, yet somehow manage to find ways to protect pedophiles instead.
I suppose there was this one case in an Indianapolis prison where a certain pedophile was required to clean the cell toilets on a daily basis...
And besides, I suppose those "criminally inclined" types will be more inclined to lend you a hand than some self-righteous moralizer ever would. Even the sports fans seem to step up and help in their own way, I guess.
I suppose you could go ahead and name them if you wanted to, though I imagine you probably know quite a few of those people, including perhaps half of the inmates over at the Indianapolis correctional facility.
If you happen to be interested in discussing this matter in greater detail, I suppose you could always reach out to me via private message.
I find myself wondering about those who have been displaced, particularly when they have children or elderly relatives to care for.
It’s quite unfortunate, I suppose, because now there will inevitably be some callous individual who tries to peddle empty platitudes along the lines of "it's all their own fault."
Well, perhaps there is some truth to that, or perhaps there isn't... but the real issue, I think, is that there are collateral victims involved—children, the elderly, and people living with disabilities.
It seems far too easy to simply follow the herd and act as a sycophant, blindly supporting the big banks and other major institutions.
Paul Evans said:Gosh, you and your brother certainly seem like a formidable duo, 😬 I suppose I should say that I am fully in favor of publicly calling out those convicted sex offenders. 👍
We aren't alone in this; there are others out there.
However, I feel we still need to find more like-minded individuals, specifically those who might be willing to offer assistance or volunteer their time in the future. It would be especially helpful to find people from other states across the country.
Perhaps once you make your way to Indianapolis, those who are willing and able to help or volunteer could gather for a meeting.
I suppose I should ask, what advice would one offer to those individuals who took out a mortgage from a bank to purchase a home, but have now decided they simply aren't going to pay it back? It seems some people act as if the property is entirely theirs by right, somehow ignoring the fact that they still owe the bank the money they borrowed. 😁
When you consider that there are families with children involved, I feel it might not be quite right to just throw them out onto the street. Perhaps there are other ways to recover the debt that don't involve such drastic measures.
A person's home feels like something sacred, whereas banks are... well, I probably shouldn't go there, unless I'm looking to get banned from the forum.
Maybe we should be looking into providing some sort of assistance—if someone is evicted along with their kids, we ought to ensure they have temporary housing, food, and at least some basic necessities.
As for the bank, I honestly couldn't care less about them. ☕
We aren't interested in political ideologies here, nor do we care for them. We certainly don't want any politics brought into our shop. 😁
Please feel free to ask whatever is on your mind, and perhaps we could even meet up for coffee sometime.
My name is Adrian, and I am currently based in Indianapolis.
My brother John is the future president of our association, also from Indianapolis.
Our third co-founder is Matthew, who is also located in Indianapolis.
If anyone needs more specific information, you can send a private message, and maybe we can grab a coffee. I suppose one of the three of us will always be available to meet up and chat. 👍
Since there seem to be quite a few energetic individuals here who might have some spare time, I thought I might pose a little poll...
Regarding our upcoming non-profit organization based out of Indianapolis, which is currently in its early developmental stages...
It is essentially like this;
My brother, another individual, and I are the founding members. We have already gathered a group of friends from various professional backgrounds who would be more than willing to volunteer their time.
By the beginning of next year, once we have secured a physical location, finalized the paperwork, and settled on an official name, the organization will be legally registered.
I suppose I should clarify right away that I am not asking any of you for money, or space, or anything of that nature; we intend to cover all expenses ourselves, so please do not worry about that. 😬
What I am asking is that once we are officially established, you might consider helping out in whatever capacity fits within your means. It certainly does not have to involve financial contributions; volunteering or donating clothing and food to those in need—such as children, the elderly, or the homeless—would be very much appreciated.
The operations of the organization will be entirely transparent, and I believe everyone should have full visibility into our work.
Since I am located in Indianapolis, it would probably be quite beneficial to have some support coming from other parts of the US as well.
Our objectives are as follows:
-Providing aid to the vulnerable, specifically focusing on children, the homeless, and the incapacitated.
-Offering guidance and assistance to those facing frozen assets or those being targeted by predatory lending institutions.
-Protecting families with children from eviction by providing both passive and active resistance.
-Publicly exposing predators through various methods.
-Filing constitutional challenges against certain laws and regulations.
-Providing counsel and support to victims of police misconduct.
-Actively advocating for animal welfare, perhaps in a manner similar to how groups like PETA operate.
Now, regarding certain matters; if someone is not comfortable with specific actions, such as engaging in active resistance during an eviction or confronting predators, please know that is perfectly fine. You can still contribute in other ways, and truly, any form of help is welcome.
For those more intense tasks, I have people who are trained and have experience dealing with law enforcement; I am one of them myself, and being detained or held in custody is not something we shy away from. We are prepared to sacrifice our own liberty for a greater cause. I realize we may be seen as people who exist somewhat on the fringes of the law, but I suspect such individuals are often more willing to actually help than those who merely pose as moralists.
If anyone feels they fall into that category, please feel free to send me a private message for further details.
But for everything else, there is a way for everyone to assist, whether through donating food and clothing or participating in protests. It would be a truly noble gesture to help those most in need, especially children.
Please let us know your thoughts; we are looking for supporters from every state across the country.
For any additional information, you can reach out to me via private message.
The organization and our facility are still in the planning phases. I will be sure to keep you updated on all developments as they occur.
At this moment, nothing is being requested of you; I simply wish to see if there are people who might be willing to help the vulnerable in one way or another once the organization is officially registered.
Chloe Cooper10 said:I suppose one might wonder whether it is strictly necessary to utilize both applicators during the process.
So, I suppose it isn't strictly necessary.
I suppose you could try marking the stick about three-quarters of the way down from the top, then lighting it; once the flame reaches that specific mark, voila, I guess that should do it.😍
I suppose you might not be entirely aware of how variable the combustion rate can actually be. It is quite possible that three-quarters of the fuel could burn through in a mere ten minutes, while that remaining quarter might linger for another fifty. 😬
Donna Doyle2 said:Is it possible to light incense sticks from both ends? If that were actually an option, then: You could light one stick at both ends, and once it burns out completely, you'd know exactly thirty minutes have passed.
In reality, I suppose you would need to light the second one at the exact same time. So, you would light them like this: - one stick at both ends - the other stick at just one end
--> when the first one finishes burning, thirty minutes have elapsed. At that specific moment, you should probably light the other end of the second stick—since that one has already been burning for half an hour and has thirty minutes left, lighting it from both sides would reduce that remaining time to fifteen minutes.
😁
However, I wonder how a young Buddhist would even be able to meditate if they had to constantly worry about managing the lighting of their incense sticks. 🧐
While that might technically solve the issue of calculating the time, the larger problem remains: how is a Buddhist supposed to focus on meditation for the full forty-five minutes?
A Buddhist monk once gave a young trainee the task of meditating for precisely 45 minutes. The problem is, he doesn't have a clock or a stopwatch; all he has are two incense sticks, each of which takes exactly one hour to burn, though they happen to burn at different rates.
I suppose the question is, how might this young trainee use those two sticks to measure out exactly 45 minutes? 🍿
I suppose he was attempting to pull off that 'akiro' move earlier, though it seems like that blonde lady might have somewhat distracted him from his focus. 😬
Anthony Nguyen81 said:It really just comes down to the timing of the 😬 I suppose I finished that quite some time ago, though I find that memories can be rather fragile things 😁
And honestly, who doesn't enjoy a bit of playfulness 🤣 Though it does somewhat remind me of Operation Swordfish 🤣 Which was quite a parody, if you ask me
The idea of hacking seems a bit silly. I imagine a self-respecting engineer wouldn't stoop to such low-level tactics just to go around "hacking" things, would they?
Action movies, in general, seem to be parodies themselves. I can't quite recall the name of that one movie where an action hero just types "override all security" in a single scene and instantly gains access to the entire system. 🤣
Anthony Nguyen81 said::Of course. Recursion generally operates on the principle where the first element goes in and the last one comes out, 😬 following the LIFO—or first in, last out--😬 logic. I suppose there are quite a few different combinations to consider here.😬
It is essentially the same as LIFO, just using a slightly different acronym.
In any case, I feel it is a fairly significant point for us to grasp how memory functions under this principle, specifically regarding how data is arranged when we are pushing or popping from a particular memory address.
I mean, think about how those hackers writing shellcode have to inject specific ASCII characters into the instruction pointer in reverse order.😬