Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Early Politicians

(1/3) > >>

Tinman57:
  And now it's official....

Renegade:
Hahahah~! ;D

Very cute!

Makes me wonder what the world would be like if people that actually knew what they were doing, e.g. machinists, truck drivers, farmers, engineers, programmers, physicists, doctors, etc., filled the positions that politicians try to. (One of the words that I really and truly loathe is "policy". The image above nicely explains why. :) )

Tinman57:
Hahahah~! ;D

Very cute!

Makes me wonder what the world would be like if people that actually knew what they were doing, e.g. machinists, truck drivers, farmers, engineers, programmers, physicists, doctors, etc., filled the positions that politicians try to. (One of the words that I really and truly loathe is "policy". The image above nicely explains why. :) ) -Renegade (October 30, 2012, 10:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

  The election process is set up where only the rich or well connected can get elected.  If the common man was to get elected, he/she would most likely be like a rat in an unescapeable maze, lost in the legalese.  Lawyers have everything so encrypted with all the lagalese that no one can decipher it or discover the holes without being an expert in legalese.  Hiring a lawyer would be his/her only solution, and can anyone really trust a lawyer?   ;)  Lawyers are why our written laws are so screwed up to begin with.
  Only way I could see a regular ol' Joe (or Joan) ever being able to understand things as written would be to have it all re-written at a high-school level of understanding, and they ain't gonna let that happen.  They don't want the average guy to be able to understand the laws.  Knowledge is power, and knowing the holes can make you more money...

Renegade:
Hahahah~! ;D

Very cute!

Makes me wonder what the world would be like if people that actually knew what they were doing, e.g. machinists, truck drivers, farmers, engineers, programmers, physicists, doctors, etc., filled the positions that politicians try to. (One of the words that I really and truly loathe is "policy". The image above nicely explains why. :) ) -Renegade (October 30, 2012, 10:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

  The election process is set up where only the rich or well connected can get elected.  If the common man was to get elected, he/she would most likely be like a rat in an unescapeable maze, lost in the legalese.  Lawyers have everything so encrypted with all the lagalese that no one can decipher it or discover the holes without being an expert in legalese.  Hiring a lawyer would be his/her only solution, and can anyone really trust a lawyer?   ;)  Lawyers are why our written laws are so screwed up to begin with.
  Only way I could see a regular ol' Joe (or Joan) ever being able to understand things as written would be to have it all re-written at a high-school level of understanding, and they ain't gonna let that happen.  They don't want the average guy to be able to understand the laws.  Knowledge is power, and knowing the holes can make you more money...
-Tinman57 (October 31, 2012, 08:29 PM)
--- End quote ---

+1

The language used in "law" excludes people from understanding it. The volume of laws precludes the possibility of anyone actually reading the laws.

As an interesting little aside... The word "understand" in a legal context also means "agree". So, whenever you are asked whether or not you "understand", your only answer should be "no". e.g.

You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in a court of law.
You have the right to an attorney.
If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.
Do you understand these rights I have just read to you?
--- End quote ---

Why would you agree to allow anything you say or do to be used against you?

"Hey, if you're going to beat me, why don't you use my baseball bat? And why don't I give you a nice lead pipe while I'm at it?"

Complete insanity.

The same goes for other jurisdictions.

(I don't have the reference for that ["understand"] handy at the moment - I found it in a legal dictionary somewhere, though I forget which one.)

TaoPhoenix:
Heh Renegade more twisty Moebius-ness is arising there.

They are asking if you "understand and agree to" those rights, yes? So how can you disagree with them? The mechanics of them using everything against you are in other sections, you aren't being given the chance to disagree with those! Only being told that you're gonna get hosed! And if you get too fancy claiming you don't "understand" the rights, it edges over into resisting arrest if it looks like you're being obtuse.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page