Your profession and the entire legal system is flawed and thus obsolete because it isn't objective and justice isn't blind as lawyers incorrectly claim. Your statement 'they’ve always actually committed the crime, but it’s stuff I don’t want to be bothered with' alone proves I am right. Perhaps you should get a different job.
Well, law isn't supposed to be subjective. If you don't uphold every law in the books, then why even have laws? Now you will say it is impossible to uphold every law, which is correct... and only shows how flawed the legal system is. If you don't pursue a charge of someone putting their trash in a neighbor’s trash can, then why even have that law? Also, the way our top law enforcement institutions handle Obamagate only shows US law has no merrit. If they cannot do it properly, Why even bother? As a lawyer, you don't produce anything meaningful based on reason that couldn't have happened otherwise. It's just a scam and people get indicted based on a whim. If I as a MD treated my patients like that, half of them would be dead by now.
If that is true why do we need a SCOTUS since every single judge in the country would come to the same conclusion. There would be no need to overturn decisions of lower courts since the law is clear cut and consequently not a matter of interpretation, aka subjectivity. Even worse, if the law was truly objective, there would be no dissenting judges in the Supreme Court and Dems and Reps wouldn't care who is nominated because every judge would be objective. We all know this is not the case. If SCOTUS judges were objective as you claim, why don't you explain why the Dems and Reps are so eager to pick their own SCOTUS judges?
Your profession and the entire legal system is flawed and thus obsolete because it isn't objective and justice isn't blind as lawyers incorrectly claim. Your statement 'they’ve always actually committed the crime, but it’s stuff I don’t want to be bothered with' alone proves I am right. Perhaps you should get a different job.
Well, law isn't supposed to be subjective. If you don't uphold every law in the books, then why even have laws? Now you will say it is impossible to uphold every law, which is correct... and only shows how flawed the legal system is. If you don't pursue a charge of someone putting their trash in a neighbor’s trash can, then why even have that law? Also, the way our top law enforcement institutions handle Obamagate only shows US law has no merrit. If they cannot do it properly, Why even bother? As a lawyer, you don't produce anything meaningful based on reason that couldn't have happened otherwise. It's just a scam and people get indicted based on a whim. If I as a MD treated my patients like that, half of them would be dead by now.
If that is true why do we need a SCOTUS since every single judge in the country would come to the same conclusion. There would be no need to overturn decisions of lower courts since the law is clear cut and consequently not a matter of interpretation, aka subjectivity. Even worse, if the law was truly objective, there would be no dissenting judges in the Supreme Court and Dems and Reps wouldn't care who is nominated because every judge would be objective. We all know this is not the case. If SCOTUS judges were objective as you claim, why don't you explain why the Dems and Reps are so eager to pick their own SCOTUS judges?
Write that again the next time you need a plumber, a doctor or need your car fixed.
They are not based on a flawed system like jurisprudence which is a total joke.