Re: [Leica] Uh.... earth to wannabe lawyers

[Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com>]

At 2:34 PM -0500 3/26/02, Teresa299@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 3/26/02 6:13:59 AM, darkroom@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
><< The need for lawyers (in a grand sense) is because of the, in my opinion,
>over complexity of our laws.  This need is, in a large sense, self made,
>since, for the most part, lawyers write the laws.  Unlike the need for
>doctors, who do not make up the illnesses.  I am in no way suggesting that
>lawyers can't and don't serve a very useful function...but the need is WAY
>to overbearing, in my opinion.  A somewhat intelligent person should be able
>to take care of %99 of the legal issues one needs to take care of.>>
>
>Well, in one sense, lawyers exist because the theory is that it's better to
>go to court and battle rather than to beat the crap out of each other on the
>streets. 
>
>In a previous life cycle I used to practice law.  I got out because I
>realized there were better things to do with my life rather than to deal with
>angry people.
>
>A few cynical observations:
>
>People hate lawyers until they need one.
>
>If people learned to deal with others in a respectful manner, then a huge
>percentage of cases would never hit the courts.  Case in point--family law. 
>Folks would often times prefer to spend the family's assets in the form of
>lawyer fees rather than to divide it equitably at the outset.
>
>Yes, the laws are ridiculously complex, obfuscating (lawyer word) simple
>understanding by lay people.  Many laws started with a simple concept (i.e.
>equal rights, freedom from injury by others) but become increasingly complex
>because people disagree with those concepts, sue, and attempt to narrow or
>influence the laws.    Laws and legal forms are often complex because the
>folks on the other side (non-lawyers) are intentionally trying to pull one
>over on the other party.  To say so in plain English makes it harder, thus
>they hire (their lawyers) to make plain English into legalese gibberish.
>
>Lawyers exist because when (like on the LUG) disagreements break out, simple
>intelligence as well as compassion and understanding give way to ego, power,
>and pettiness.  Maybe if we can reinvent the human animal then the need for
>lawyers as well as cops and trauma centers might be reduced.
>
>
><<If there weren't so many personal injury lawyers looking for personal injury
>cases, I don't believe there would be so many personal injury cases.  Some
>personal injury cases are entirely legitimate, but a large number of the
>ones I hear about (and know first hand) are just absurd, and would not go
>anywhere unless some unscrupulous lawyer got involved.  The sad part is,
>these lawyers get companies to pay up, though their claims are a joke,
>because the cost of litigating, and the POTENTIAL for large awards is there.
>
>This was in no way meant to offend anyone, but is simply my personal view on
>the subject.>>
>
>Personal injury cases exist because people drive drunk and crash into others,
>people own vicious dogs that attack other people, people make tires that
>blow-out, cars that blow-up on minor impact and dump toxic chemicals and junk
>into the water that other people are attempting to drink.  In short, people
>do irresponsible things that hurt other people.  We have criminal laws that
>punish folks for doing such actions, why is wanting to be financially
>compensated any crazier?   You really want to reduce the number of personal
>injury lawyers?  Then start rewiring people who think it's okay to do these
>kind of things--rewire people so these acts aren't done in the first place.
>
>The bizarro cases everyone talks about make the news because they're bizarro
>and because they are kept in the public eye because they often serve the
>needs of special interest, think-tank lobby groups who are trying to sway
>public opinion for their own purposes (generally profit). 
>
>
>In the old days, lawyers were at the top of a very short list of hated
>professions.  If one looks around you can see that the list is getting pretty
>crowded....
>
>Business executives like Enron folks who screw over shareholders and
>employees, and the state of California,
>Accounting executives and workers who help doctor the books,
>HMO-Insurance executives, (ruined the health care profession),
>Catholic Priests, (too much sex not enough confessions)
>Doctors, (more time on the golf course, 15 minute appointments and no
>housecalls)
>Politicians, (say no more)
>Plumbers (charge too much),
>College Professors (damn liberals),
>
>Pretty much the only groups excluded from hated professionals right now are
>those in the armed services, FDNY and sex industry workers.
>
>Am I defending lawyers?  Not really.  I'm merely pointing out that before any
>one person starts to get full of themselves on how one profession acts more
>ethically than others, for folks to look in the mirror and ask themselves how
>much are they, or have they contributed to the current system they dislike,
>and how much they are willing to do, to change society in a way that so that
>all citizens are respectful of the rights of other citizens--and thus reduce
>the need for lawyers in the first place.
>
>
>-kim

Well said, and that should (but probably won't be ... <sigh>) the 
last on that topic.

- -- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html