lpnmajor wrote:
How effective would the sentences be, if criminals were in charge of writing sentencing guidelines? No one would be surprised at the lightness of sentences were that to be the case, so why the surprise here?
All laws are written by lawyers, all guidelines pertaining to following those laws are written by lawyers. All investigations of lawyers thought to be violating those guidelines are conducted by lawyers and all sentences for those violations are handed down by lawyers. See a pattern yet?
Ever see an ad for a drug? That tiny fine print and verbal warnings are written by lawyers. Insurance policies and all the exclusions are written by lawyers. Hospital policy is written by lawyers. Phone, cable and satellite contracts are written by lawyers. Most employment applications are written by lawyers. In short, try to find ANYTHING, that is not written by or approved by lawyers. Now do you see the pattern?
Laws are not about justice, or ensuring life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness - unless you happen to be a lawyer - laws are about keeping lawyers employed and ensuring that they stay employed and protecting the "reputation" of the exclusive lawyer clique.
How effective would the sentences be, if criminals... (
show quote)
I agree with you to a point. The reason lawyers are involved in every transcript is for the sue happy people. If I owned a business I'd have lawyers all over anything I made and marketed. That way when someone feels like filling out their welfare information was too hard this month, they can't sue me for millions because "my coffee was too hot and they experienced discomfort"