View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 20, 2004, 02:12am
Jim S Jim S is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kirkland, Washington
Posts: 422
Send a message via ICQ to Jim S Send a message via AIM to Jim S
Ed, the difference is that the definition in this case is just that , a definition. It doesn't define what being in the NZ illegally is. The later rule does that.
Some of the definitions have rules attached to them. And that's why we're always trying to get people to read, read, and re-read Rule 2. It's also where a lot of the mistakes in application of rules occur, because people don't get the ground floor down and have only assumptions to build on. Not jumping on you about this, just like to get a plug in for studying Rule 2 whenever possible.

[Edited by Jim S on May 20th, 2004 at 03:16 AM]
__________________
Jim Schroeder

Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2!
Reply With Quote