help me inturprate something

[Duffy Waddon]

can the phrase,"to provice a benefit to the general public"be hinted to say that it should be for the public and therefore have no discrimination. How can I argue that and will it work in the supreme court. Also are you a lawyer. The following is the article. It was made by the national forest service.
Commercial permits

Each year, the Forest Service receives thousands of individual and business applications for authorization for use of public land we manage. The agency’s special-use program, which follows agency policy and federal law, allows uses of those lands that provide a benefit to the general public and protect public and natural resources values. Contact your local forest or grassland where you want to use the permit for more information.

 

[CTU]

can the phrase,"to provice a benefit to the general public"be hinted to say that it should be for the public and therefore have no discrimination. How can I argue that and will it work in the supreme court. Also are you a lawyer. The following is the article. It was made by the national forest service.
Commercial permits

Each year, the Forest Service receives thousands of individual and business applications for authorization for use of public land we manage. The agency’s special-use program, which follows agency policy and federal law, allows uses of those lands that provide a benefit to the general public and protect public and natural resources values. Contact your local forest or grassland where you want to use the permit for more information.

If you want an attorney's answer, pay an attorney.

You're welcome.

And for the record, FA is not your personal sounding-off board. I suggest you remember that.

 

[FlyingRon]

The government is not supposed to be discriminating against race, creed, national origin, etc... period. What exactly are you after? It's tedious for you to throw out random things looking for straws that you can grasp on to to try to pervert into supporting whatever argument are trying to form. Give us the real problem if you want answers.

There are a couple of lawyers here, but as you were told in the terms and conditions when you signed up (which you probably didn't bother to read), most here are NOT lawyers. In any case, lawyer or not, this forum should not be construed as legal counsel. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum is never a substitute for personal advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction you have retained to represent you.

 

[Silverplum]

If you want an attorney's answer, pay an attorney.

You're welcome.

And for the record, FA is not your personal sounding-off board. I suggest you remember that.

Like!

And Flying Ron's, too: Like!

 

[Silverplum]

can the phrase,"to provice a benefit to the general public"be hinted to say that it should be for the public and therefore have no discrimination. How can I argue that and will it work in the supreme court. Also are you a lawyer. The following is the article. It was made by the national forest service.
Commercial permits

Each year, the Forest Service receives thousands of individual and business applications for authorization for use of public land we manage. The agency’s special-use program, which follows agency policy and federal law, allows uses of those lands that provide a benefit to the general public and protect public and natural resources values. Contact your local forest or grassland where you want to use the permit for more information.

Your "idea" is silly and not worth our time. And the answer is NO. If you want to understand why and can't figure it out, hire an attorney to explain ut.

 

[adjusterjack]

If you are worried that you will be kicked out of our national parks because you are a man wearing a skirt, don't worry about it.

It'll more likely be your snotty attitude that gets you kicked out.

And there are no anti-discrimination laws protecting snotty people.

 

[quincy]

can the phrase,"to provice a benefit to the general public"be hinted to say that it should be for the public and therefore have no discrimination. How can I argue that and will it work in the supreme court. Also are you a lawyer. The following is the article. It was made by the national forest service.
Commercial permits

Each year, the Forest Service receives thousands of individual and business applications for authorization for use of public land we manage. The agency’s special-use program, which follows agency policy and federal law, allows uses of those lands that provide a benefit to the general public and protect public and natural resources values. Contact your local forest or grassland where you want to use the permit for more information.

Here is a link to the Forest Service's Special-use Permit Application: http://www.fs.fed.us/working-with-us/contracts-commercial-permits/special-use-permit-application

Here is a link to 36 CFR Part 251, Land Uses: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/36/part-251

And, finally, here is a link to appealing a denial of an application: http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/includes/36cfr251.htm

What special use do you wish to make of national forest land? What does this have to do with discrimination and the Supreme Court? If this question has something to do with your skirt-wearing in Texas or your autism, please from now on keep all questions in a single thread. Thank you.