Registration Permission/Release & Emergency/Medical Information Form: Fill & Download for Free

Yes.Minance is a SEBI registered Investment Advisor (IA), our registration number is INA200012434. You can verify our registration here. (enter our number in the search)We are also a registered Authorised Persons of IIFL Securities (AP0106120161034).All brokers, sub-brokers, and APs are regulated by SEBI (Stock Brokers and Sub Brokers) Regulations, 1992 and appropriate circulars and guidelines released from time to time.The next logical question is how does Minance have access to place trades through your account once you have given us permission. We have terminal access to your account. Related SEBI circular: http://www.sebi.gov.in/circulars/2009/mirsdcir01.pdf

My ex-husband was a clean cut black doctor. One day he was out driving our car, which was a rather plain looking ride by the way. Back then we drove a Nissan Altima. It was khaki colored and didn’t have any special attention grabbing features, so it wouldn’t be the car most cops would come after.He was driving 55 mph in a 55 mph zone so he clearly wasn’t speeding. The officer pulls him over, and asks for his license and registration. He says,”What seems to be the problem officer?” The officer said,”You were speeding.” Being the guy that he is he didn’t want any problems so he said,”How fast was I going?” (Sigh) The officer said 55. Right across the street from where they were parked the speed zone sign said 55 mph. He didn’t say a word to the officer he just gave him his paper work. Truth is… if you give me a ticket it’s going to get thrown out or I will pay it but I’m not about to argue with an angry poorly paid C- student turned cop, so whatever, I agree with his decision.*** Wait Pause*** I am saying he was a ‘C - student turned cop’, because he confirmed we were going 55 in a 55 mph zone. Does that sound like he was an A+ student turned cop? I never said all cops were C- students, but I can assure you that C- students think you are speeding if you are going the exact speed limit. *** Thanks for listening to me vent.***The officer then comes back to the car after running his license and everything came back clean… in a really strange tone of voice he said,”Soooo, if you let me search your trunk, I will let yah off with a little warning this time.” By then I was getting a little disappointed because he was clearly targeting us and who knows if he was going to plant something in the trunk or not. He clearly lied about why he pulled us over so whatever else he did would be questionable as well.So, my ex husband shrugs his shoulders like he didn’t care. He said,”Well, sure officer go ahead.” The cop searches his car then lets him leave. Neither of us said a word on the drive home. We knew we were racially profiled, harassed and targeted for the color of our skin. We also knew that even though we were college graduates, with clean backgrounds and no criminal issues that even though we knew our rights it didn’t matter. It was our word against a racist white cops and in that situation he was powerless.Fast forward …. 9 years later, a cop pulls me over and asked if he could search my car. I politely said,”Absolutely not. You won’t be embarrassing me in front of my neighbors by searching my car like I’m some criminal just because you are bored.” I looked him square in the face and he laughed and then asked me out to dinner. Wow, ummm no thanks!Cops try to get you to give them permission to tear apart your car for no reason! If you give them permission and they find something that they think is drugs they can arrest you and ruin your day only to have to release you later when they find out it’s crackers, smashed up potato chips or etc. I know my rights, and no you can’t search my car.Note: Since I wrote this post a few people have sent very aggressive emails. To be clearer, I’m not making comments about all cops. I think it is fair to make assumptions about someone’s intelligence, if they tell you that you were speeding by going the actual speed limit. I clearly stated that we were told we were going 55 mph in a 55 mph zone so he wasn’t very bright to use that as an excuse to pull us over. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out. I can safely assume he did not do well in school, so can you.Don’t forget to like my post, if you like the answer.

In your opinion, what is the maximum amount of gun control that should be in the US? (From background checks to any extreme gun control attempts.)While I generally disdain gun control, the question has been put to me what rules would I impose, and I felt it to be a fair question. This is a working list, the best rules I’ve come up with so far, to both not abridge individual liberty, yet still deal with criminal misuse of arms.The right of the people to be secure in their persons and property, the need for self-defense and civil defense, being vital to the liberty of a free people, the right of the people, in part and in whole, to keep and bear arms, shall be subject only to the following abridgements.For the purposes of this article, arms shall be defined as any armament, weapon, ordinance, munition, or tool, used in warfare, self-defense, civil defense, hunting, or sport, designed or used in the present, past, or future, as well as parts, accessories, components, or ammunition for same.Atomic, Biological, and Chemical weapons, suitable only for aggressive warfare, being tools of International Affairs and matters of State, being useful only as strategic weapons, are not protected by this article.Any person, upon reaching the age of legal majority, may own, carry, and use, arms of any sort, as well as ammunition, accessories, or components for same.Any person, not yet of the age of majority, may not own firearms, explosives, or incendiaries, but is not prohibited from owning arms of any other sort.Any person, not yet of the age of majority, is not prohibited from carrying and using arms of any sort that they may own, as well as ammunition, accessories, or components for same.Any person, not yet of the age of majority, may carry and use arms of any sort, with the permission of a parent or legal guardian, and under the supervision of a person who has reached the age of majority.There being a danger of negligent discharge to the public, any municipality may restrict the discharge of firearms for purely recreational purposes.Municipalities must provide means for the people to construct and own safe recreational firing facilities.Municipalities may not restrict recreational discharge of firearms on private property where the projectile discharged is contained within the property.Municipalities may not restrict the discharge of firearms used in self-defense.No person may be denied the right to arms, but upon criminal conviction for a violent crime, and restricted only to the type of arm used in the commission of the crime for which said person was convicted.Upon ten years of good conduct, with no further conviction of violent crime of any sort, this abridgment is expired.Upon repeat conviction of a violent felony, the term of abridgment is reset and five years added.Any person, upon reaching the age of majority, retains the right to restrict or deny the carrying of arms only within or upon their house, dwelling, or personal property owned by said person.If a property is owned personally by more than one person, all persons must agree to deny the right of the people to carry arms.Such denial must be stated verbally or in written form, and announced or posted before non-owners have entered the property, to be valid.Such denial may not be enforced against sworn law enforcement officers or military personnel in the commission of their duties.Such denial may not be enforced at public venues, even if used or reserved for private events.That fees, licenses, and registrations, have been used to enforce a de-facto ban and denial of the right to arms, to restrict the right to arms to the social elite, and to mutate the right to arms into a privilege, no fees, licenses, or registrations may be levied on the people to exercise their right to arms.This article shall not be used or construed to release any person from liability for criminal negligence or criminal maliciousness, resulting in injury to persons or damage to property by use of arms.Persons or the estates of persons injured or killed while in the commission of a crime, have no right to claim liability upon persons defending themselves or others.The State or Federal Government are not prohibited from implementing a background check system, providing such system meets the following stipulations.Qualifying crimes are restricted to conviction of violent crimes, or convictions of violations of this article.Any Background Check system implemented must provide swift satisfaction. Any inquiry not resolved within thirty minutes will be presumed to have passed.The Background Check must be free of cost to the buyer and seller at the point of sale.Neither the buyer nor seller is required to maintain records of sale.The State and Federal Government are prohibited from maintaining records of Background Check inquiries, or sales or transfers of arms.Upon investigation of a suspect sale regarding the unlawful sale of arms, the burden of proof rests solely on the State or Federal Government to prove that:The buyer was on the prohibited list at the time of sale of the arm in questionThe Seller either failed to perform or failed to attempt to perform the check, or ignored the restricted status when so informedThe State or Federal Government is required to prosecute attempts to circumvent any Background Check system so implemented, by both sellers or buyersAny Background Check System implemented must be available for use by any person within the jurisdiction of the governing body imposing the system.No person shall be required to retreat or flee, or otherwise subject themselves to harm, molestation, or harassment, before defending themselves or others from persons presenting a clear or present danger.Any civil or military official, employee, or personnel, who attempts to circumvent this article, or deny the right to keep and bear arms in any way not enumerated in this article, shall be imprisoned for not less than 10 years, fined not less than $100,000, and forfeit their own right to keep and bear arms for not less than 10 years upon release from incarceration.This article hereby establishes the Militia of the United States, being all able-bodied persons at least 17 years of age, who are, or who have made declaration of intent to become, Citizens of the United States of America, and are not at present members of the Regular Armed Forces of the United States of America. The classes of militia are:The Organized Militia, which shall consist of the National Guard, Naval Militia, and State MilitiasThe Unorganized Militia, which shall consist of all members of the Militia who are not members of the Organized MilitiaNo authority, jurisdiction, or territory, may add further restrictions or abridgments to the right to keep and bear arms.No person shall ever be required to present or describe an especial need or requirement of arms. The right is presumed for all people, and protected by this article.Any right, privilege, or liberty, relating to arms, not expressly addressed, enumerated, or abridged, in this article, is retained by the people, in part and in whole. Any ambiguity or question arising from this article, shall be resolved in the manner most permissive and in accordance with the right to keep and bear arms.I welcome constructive input. I am not a lawyer. I have tried to cover all bases here. If my wording or intent is anywhere unclear, or if you feel I have omitted something vital, please let me know in the comments and I shall either explain how it is addressed already, or adjust my answer accordingly.Please note, as I expect this issue to arise, if your reply has to do with issues such as carrying openly or concealed, suppressors, SBRs, or similar, such issues are already addressed in Section 16. In that, as none of those issues are expressly addressed, they are by default permitted.This answer is updated from Murphy Barrett's answer to Starting from a blank slate in the US, what forms of constitutional firearm regulations would gun owners support?