Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2849
Replied on 12-03-2006, 02:32 PM
Reply With Quote

Don't worry; this site and all the speech on it is protected by the first amendment. Gerrity is just trying to bully people. He is all talk and no bite. Don't even respond to him. The FBI will be responding to him soon enough.


Moderator

Posts: 2,294
Credits: 26,419


Send message to DebtCruncher
Sub: #2850
Replied on 12-03-2006, 02:49 PM
Reply With Quote

I went through and read about 40 pages of the 190 there are, with a focus on the two dates listed in the letter from the attorney.

I do not find anything so extreme that it should constitute an illegal act; simply "the public" voicing its dealings with a sham company.

I think our lawyer friend thinks that because he is a lawyer, you have to believe him "or there will be consequences." He is not the law, nor is he a judge; it is idle threats.

He wants to get offended because someone said "we'll take you down too." And because people made comments that we should file complaints to his bar.

If he has nothing to be afraid of, then he should not worry about people making complaints, because his bar would dismiss any complaints that do not have merit.

Since I am not involved in the matter, I cannot allege his involvement in any wrongdoing. But it would seem that if he is representing a company that is being investigated for fraud or other wrongdoings, then he would be a party to it.

I believe in our 1st amendment rights; and I do not believe his threats should keep people from voicing their free speech. I am even tempted to write a letter to his office, personally voicing my dismay.


Moderator

Posts: 2,294
Credits: 26,419


Send message to DebtCruncher
Sub: #2851
Replied on 12-03-2006, 03:34 PM
Reply With Quote

Taken from US CODE, title 47, section 230:
Quote:
(a) Findings
The Congress finds the following:
(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity.
(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services have flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation.

...

(b) Policy
It is the policy of the United States—
(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services and other interactive media;
(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation;

...

(c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
(2) Civil liability
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or
(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).[1]
I think that Vikas, Mike and our moderators have, without a doubt, put in a good faith effort to keep obscene material off of this site; that is all that is recquired...

Last, but not least, I found this on Mercury News .com, it is a story from November 21:

Quote:
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News
Download a copy of the court's decision (PDF)

Legions of Web users and Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other major Internet providers dodged a legal morass Monday when the California Supreme Court ruled they cannot be sued for posting or distributing libelous material written by others.

In a 34-page ruling, the state's high court overturned a lower court decision that had stripped immunity against such lawsuits and alarmed free speech advocates who warned it could chill expression on the Internet.
[/quote]

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2852
Replied on 12-03-2006, 05:45 PM
Reply With Quote

Debt Cruncher, you've said it all. Your the man.

Posts: 2,477
Credits: 39,498


Send message to KYSIDE38
Sub: #2853 loan
Replied on 12-03-2006, 06:00 PM
Reply With Quote

Debtcruncher is the man with the plan. KYSIDE38

__________________
RYDERS OF THE NIGHT

Posts: 63
Credits: 1,264


Send message to mavric
Sub: #2854
Replied on 12-03-2006, 07:21 PM
Reply With Quote

The thing I find funny is that Mr. G is upset over not hearing a response back. Well sir, welcome to our world. You did not respond to us when we contacted you, or me anyhow. I dont think I even need to go into how long I have waited to hear back from your clients.

Good Day...

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2855
Replied on 12-04-2006, 04:22 AM
Reply With Quote

I beleive Gerity is definitely in on this thing too and I think at this point they are all scared and trying whatever they can to get out of it or to put a different focus on this whole thing. This forum represents freedom of speech and if they had not ripped us all off, we would not be talking about this right now and they would have no worries... all 3 of them have reason to worry right now. This forum is safe and protected by our constitutional rights.

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2856
Replied on 12-04-2006, 05:29 AM
Reply With Quote

I think that Gerity should BRING IT ON if he wants. What better way to get attention to what has really happened to all who have lost $$$ because of his clients. They can file suit, and then EVERYONE who has been screwed can reply or have their say in a court, legally. FINALLY.
I really think this attorney is as bad as the clients he represents in this case. I think he is full of hot air and trying to bully eveyone.

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2857 Lawyer
Replied on 12-04-2006, 07:42 AM
Reply With Quote

You can bet he has something to do with all of this, and sharing in the profits of ripping people off, what kind of a lawyer is that???

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2858
Replied on 12-05-2006, 04:15 AM
Reply With Quote

I can not read the responses back to Gerity. They will not pull up.... please advise someone.

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2859 letter
Replied on 12-05-2006, 03:51 PM
Reply With Quote

I got mine -- but I was ripped off by Chromelotus wheels --another Stanton bogus Co

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2860
Replied on 12-05-2006, 06:30 PM
Reply With Quote

uh oh guys. The Stantons are reopening their scam again. This time located out of their home at per the BBB. They opened their file 11/06. Looks like they are again looking to steal from the poor and give to themselves.

email address removed as per forum rules -

Anonymous
Anonymous
Posts: n/a
Credits: 0
[Check]

Sub: #2861
Replied on 12-05-2006, 06:32 PM
Reply With Quote

The above post is public information located on the BBB website. Administrators please don't remove. They are reopening the dreaded risk management partners, ltd as of 11/06.

Posts: 170
Credits: 2,903


Send message to MadMom
Sub: #2862
Replied on 12-06-2006, 12:58 PM
Reply With Quote

Kyside 38 i sent you a pm, sorry to take so long responding. Hadn't logged in for a few days

Posts: 7
Credits: 171


Send message to wldhair
Sub: #2863 I just registered
Replied on 12-06-2006, 03:55 PM
Reply With Quote

How do I get the Stanton current address

Posts: 7
Credits: 171


Send message to wldhair
Sub: #2864
Replied on 12-06-2006, 04:01 PM
Reply With Quote

I'm new at this ---I was ripped off by Chromelotus Wheels (Chris Stanton) and I've been tracking them on my own for about a year--I have talked the their Lawyer Mr Garrety( he seems as bad as the Stantons )
I'm amazed at the amount of money that has been stolen from you people and my heart go out to all of you . Don't give up .
As for me -- the amount I lost is hmmmm postage lol for the Stantons (1,774.00) but I simply cannot left them get away with it ----- WE bikers have a way of dealing with people who steal from us--- We tend to do things are own way

Page 179 of 200 « First < 79 129 169 177 178 179 180 181 189 > Last »



«Previous Thread | Next Thread»
Thread Tools
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:48 PM.






About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Affiliate | Sitemap | Espanol | RSS Feeds| Terms of Services
* Disclosures:
  • By signing up for counseling session, your provided details (Name, Email ID and Phone No.) will be forwarded to the company advertising on the DebtCC. However, you have no obligation to use their services.
  • Some creditors and collection agencies refuse to lower the pay off amount, interest rate, and fees owed by the consumer.
  • Creditors/collection agencies can make collection calls and file lawsuits against the consumers represented by the debt relief companies.
  • Debt relief services may have a negative impact on the consumer's creditworthiness and his overall debt amount may increase due to the accumulation of extra fees.
  • The amount which the consumer saves with the use of debt relief services can be regarded as taxable income.
Page loaded in 0.079 seconds.