FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OzJohnnie]

Finally.

The footy starts tonight, Collingwood vs Freemantle (last year's loser in the Grand Final).  Round 1 is spread over two weeks. The Hawks play next Saturday afternoon.

[BDB]

Happy Pi-Day! 3.14 

[DuffMan]

Rejoice, fellow nerds!  My company is bringing in pies for all to celebrate today. 

[HSCTiger74]

Tragic news. No other way to put it.

Here's the part of the article that confused me:

Social host ordinance

Authorities haven't said where the underage drinkers at the party obtained alcohol, but the county has a social host law, which holds criminally responsible any adult who allows a group of people under 21 to drink alcohol on public or private property. The deputy said 20 vehicles were parked at the farmhouse Saturday night.

The farmhouse is owned by Gary Hastad, who lives up the street. His brother, Keith, the farmhouse's previous owner, died in a grain bin accident at the farm in 2010. The farmhouse is now vacant, and calls to Gary Hastad were not returned.

Assuming Hastad didn't know about the party before hand, I'd hope they'd pursue charges against anyone who knowing supplied the alcohol, not to the guy who's land the party happened on (again, assuming he wasn't in the know). I would hope the 'allows' language means if he didn't know he's not responsible. Common sense would seem to dictate as much.

I am not a lawyer but I agree common sense would mean those who supply not some unknowing land owner.
We need Finsleft or Johnnie Red to pipe in here.
This would be a tragic unintended consequence of this law if an unknowing land owner would potentially be held responsible for an incident such as this.
Duffman brings up a good point about seasonal lake  property. If a group of kids decide to park their pontoon off your dock in the middle of the week and throw a party...and you are 100 miles away how can you be held responsible?

I agree with both of the above posts but as a non-lawyer I have to ask, when was the last time that common sense and the legal system had any more than a passing acquaintance?

[OzJohnnie]

Tragic news. No other way to put it.

Here's the part of the article that confused me:

Social host ordinance

Authorities haven't said where the underage drinkers at the party obtained alcohol, but the county has a social host law, which holds criminally responsible any adult who allows a group of people under 21 to drink alcohol on public or private property. The deputy said 20 vehicles were parked at the farmhouse Saturday night.

The farmhouse is owned by Gary Hastad, who lives up the street. His brother, Keith, the farmhouse's previous owner, died in a grain bin accident at the farm in 2010. The farmhouse is now vacant, and calls to Gary Hastad were not returned.

Assuming Hastad didn't know about the party before hand, I'd hope they'd pursue charges against anyone who knowing supplied the alcohol, not to the guy who's land the party happened on (again, assuming he wasn't in the know). I would hope the 'allows' language means if he didn't know he's not responsible. Common sense would seem to dictate as much.

I am not a lawyer but I agree common sense would mean those who supply not some unknowing land owner.
We need Finsleft or Johnnie Red to pipe in here.
This would be a tragic unintended consequence of this law if an unknowing land owner would potentially be held responsible for an incident such as this.
Duffman brings up a good point about seasonal lake  property. If a group of kids decide to park their pontoon off your dock in the middle of the week and throw a party...and you are 100 miles away how can you be held responsible?

I agree with both of the above posts but as a non-lawyer I have to ask, when was the last time that common sense and the legal system had any more than a passing acquaintance?

July 21st, 1925.

[Retired Old Rat]

I agree with both of the above posts but as a non-lawyer I have to ask, when was the last time that common sense and the legal system had any more than a passing acquaintance?

July 21st, 1925.

You may have just opened a big can of worms.

[stanbob]

I agree with both of the above posts but as a non-lawyer I have to ask, when was the last time that common sense and the legal system had any more than a passing acquaintance?

July 21st, 1925.

You may have just opened a big can of worms.

I was going for 5 Dec 1933

[Robert Zimmerman]

Rejoice, fellow nerds!  My company is bringing in pies for all to celebrate today. 

Next year's pie day should be epic: 3.1415

[RoyalsFan]

I am not a lawyer but I agree common sense would mean those who supply not some unknowing land owner.
We need Finsleft or Johnnie Red to pipe in here.
This would be a tragic unintended consequence of this law if an unknowing land owner would potentially be held responsible for an incident such as this.
Duffman brings up a good point about seasonal lake  property. If a group of kids decide to park their pontoon off your dock in the middle of the week and throw a party...and you are 100 miles away how can you be held responsible?

I'm not a lawyer either, but I don't know how you could hold the land owner responsible if they weren't aware of the party. In this case, it sounds like the kids were trespassing on private property. That's like saying a home owner is responsible if someone breaks into their home while they were away just because the crime was committed on their property.

[OzJohnnie]

I agree with both of the above posts but as a non-lawyer I have to ask, when was the last time that common sense and the legal system had any more than a passing acquaintance?

July 21st, 1925.

You may have just opened a big can of worms.

I was going for 5 Dec 1933

I had to sober up before I could remember the significance of that date.

[sjusection105]

I am not a lawyer but I agree common sense would mean those who supply not some unknowing land owner.
We need Finsleft or Johnnie Red to pipe in here.
This would be a tragic unintended consequence of this law if an unknowing land owner would potentially be held responsible for an incident such as this.
Duffman brings up a good point about seasonal lake  property. If a group of kids decide to park their pontoon off your dock in the middle of the week and throw a party...and you are 100 miles away how can you be held responsible?

I'm not a lawyer either, but I don't know how you could hold the land owner responsible if they weren't aware of the party. In this case, it sounds like the kids were trespassing on private property. That's like saying a home owner is responsible if someone breaks into their home while they were away just because the crime was committed on their property.

Exactly, that's why I said it would be tragic. There are so many laws on the books that do have unintended consequences. With the tragic death of a young man in this situation I would certainly hope that the landowner was not aware of the party being conducted and thus he should be held harmless.

[OzJohnnie]

For the few folks with an hour to spare and a deeper interest in Aussie Rules Football, here's a unique feature that Fox Footy channel made this year.  It's called the 2013 Grand Final Replay.  They show highlights of a session where they replayed the game with a number of key Hawthorn players, the coach and various club legends watching.  You get the commentary and thoughts of the guys as they went through the game.  It starts at the final moments of the Prelim Final victory over the Cats which qualified Hawthorn into the Grand Final.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqibj4e_hiM

[OzJohnnie]

Holy s**t, Batman.  I've spent a Sunday in computer virus hell.  And it turns out I wasn't infected but my ISP's DNS server was.  Long story short: study the web and learn how to set up your home network to use Norton ConnectSafe, a free DNS service that protects you from phishing (the virus hell I had today) among other things. It can also provide porn filtering and even stricter filters if you like. It can protect your home network so all devices using it are protected. Also if your kid has a mobile device you can set it up there. Very handy.

EDIT: Mrs Oz half accuses me of getting the ISP infected on purpose so I could avoid assembling the kit shed we bought.  She laughed when she said it but I suspect she really meant it deep down.

[SUMMIT!!!!!]

Holy s**t, Batman.  I've spent a Sunday in computer virus hell.  And it turns out I wasn't infected but my ISP's DNS server was.  Long story short: study the web and learn how to set up your home network to use Norton ConnectSafe, a free DNS service that protects you from phishing (the virus hell I had today) among other things. It can also provide porn filtering and even stricter filters if you like. It can protect your home network so all devices using it are protected. Also if your kid has a mobile device you can set it up there. Very handy.

EDIT: Mrs Oz half accuses me of getting the ISP infected on purpose so I could avoid assembling the kit shed we bought.  She laughed when she said it but I suspect she really meant it deep down.

I assume this filter weeds out bad stuff that isn't very believable and only allows top quality porn to flow through, right? 

[OzJohnnie]

I assume this filter weeds out bad stuff that isn't very believable and only allows top quality porn to flow through, right? 

Yessir.  There isn't anything more frustrating than trying to sneak a quick peek at some quality pron than to find out it it's that low grade stuff.  Amaright?