Originally posted by AThousandYoungAll lawyers are scumbags, unless they are defending me.
There's a lot of lawyer hate out there. In my opinion, lawyers are how civilized people handle disputes. Most of those who hate lawyers seem to think it's better to simply assault people you don't like; that is, might makes right, and violence is how disputes should be settled. Lawyers are how we avoid such an outcome and are thus to be respected, not put down.
Thoughts?
Originally posted by AThousandYoungLawyers charge too much money and generally do very little. I have to send documents to lawyers quite regularly, to have them checked over...... and a few weeks later the same documents come back with a letter saying "Please check these documents over and if there is anything you don't like about them let me know."
There's a lot of lawyer hate out there. In my opinion, lawyers are how civilized people handle disputes. Most of those who hate lawyers seem to think it's better to simply assault people you don't like; that is, might makes right, and violence is how disputes should be settled. Lawyers are how we avoid such an outcome and are thus to be respected, not put down.
Thoughts?
The bill for this "service" is £180 each time!!
Effing useless talentless overpriced smug bastards with a license to print money!! I effing hate them!!
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to vent my spleen. aaaah... that's better.
Oh yes and estate agents....
Originally posted by slimjimWell, I'd imagine you wouldn't like them with your habit of threatening people with bodily harm for stupid things, thug.
They are scumbags.
By the way, when are you going to follow through on your threat to drive across the country and beat me up? Or are you all talk?
Lawyers are just like any other people. Good ones have a desire to contribute to civilization and bad ones are just in it to make a buck. The essence of a "good" lawyer is one who devotes her life to making and supporting law. The essence of a "bad" lawyer are those who make a million bucks on a class action civil suit and keep 85% for themselves. John Edwards comes to mind there. Public records don't lie.
The problem is that the field is becoming more and more infested with these lazy drone ambulance chasers. Too bad. It used to be a rather noble thing to support civilization from the root of law to the branches above... the ordinary folk.
Now the ambulance chasers are actively trying to destroy civilization. Why? Well, let's see. Who benefits if civilization develops a "bottom feeder" mentality? A mentality of deliberately inducing fender benders for example? Chaos is an ambulance chasers wet dream.
Originally posted by SeitseIn his monumental work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon drew attention to "the chicanery of advocates who laboured to disguise the truth of the plainest facts, and to pervert the sense of the laws".
Now, seriously, people... do not confuse lawyers in the U.S. with
lawyers of the rest of the world. Obvious differences apart, I've seen
no society in the world where a person with a brain can really accept
coffee is freaking hot and McDonald's really does not have to put
a legend in the paper cup saying so... or a pen saying 'do not drink
the ink', for crying out loud!! 😞
Nothing has changed since in that respect, and the main difference between lawyers in the USA and the UK is that the former derive most of their income from private individuals whereas the latter milk the taxpayer.
Originally posted by Thales2Lawyers are a bit like policemen. Everyone says they hate them or that society would be better off without them, until they are mugged.
In his monumental work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon drew attention to "the chicanery of advocates who laboured to disguise the truth of the plainest facts, and to pervert the sense of the laws".
Nothing has changed since in that respect, and the main difference between lawyers in the USA and the UK is that the former derive most of their income from private individuals whereas the latter milk the taxpayer.
Originally posted by spruce112358I say he sues the company for having a company policiy that prohibits the distribution of asprin. Just say that it caused him to have a migrane headache that then caused him to miss all or part of the meeting and, in turn, causing him to loose $$$ because he missed the meeting. Then if your a man of color give Al Sharpton a call and make an implication that it was racially motivated and he will come and demonstrate in front of their place of business until they pay up.
Ridiculous but lucrative.
After the meeting, you sue the company claiming that their asprin caused you to become so nauseous that you missed a meeting the next day and so lost out on a multimillion dollar contract.
You want $10,000 to forget the whole thing. The company realizes it will take $20,000 in lawyer fees to win the case in court. So they ...[text shortened]... the letter. Not a bad payout, for writing a letter, is it?
Cheaper not to give you an asprin.
Originally posted by twiceaknightI'll say what I say to people who criticise techno. If it's so easy then why don't you do it?
Lawyers charge too much money and generally do very little. I have to send documents to lawyers quite regularly, to have them checked over...... and a few weeks later the same documents come back with a letter saying "Please check these documents over and if there is anything you don't like about them let me know."
The bill for this "service" is £1 ...[text shortened]... the opportunity to vent my spleen. aaaah... that's better.
Oh yes and estate agents....
Originally posted by whodeySounds like a good cause for the no1moron to take on.
I say he sues the company for having a company policiy that prohibits the distribution of asprin. Just say that it caused him to have a migrane headache that then caused him to miss all or part of the meeting and, in turn, causing him to loose $$$ because he missed the meeting. Then if your a man of color give Al Sharpton a call and make an implication that ...[text shortened]... otivated and he will come and demonstrate in front of their place of business until they pay up.
The reason for not giving out aspirin is BECAUSE of lawyers and lawsuits brought over bad reactions (true or false) after taking them.
"You gave me a bad aspirin!"
"I'm sick, it's your fault. Call the moron honey."
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI learned something very valuable about life when I was doing door to door sales.
There's a lot of lawyer hate out there. In my opinion, lawyers are how civilized people handle disputes. Most of those who hate lawyers seem to think it's better to simply assault people you don't like; that is, might makes right, and violence is how disputes should be settled. Lawyers are how we avoid such an outcome and are thus to be respected, not put down.
Thoughts?
I went to the meetings I worked 6 days a week. Went through the school. Our boss and our teacher was all about winning. He said whatever it takes. DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN. Now i thought about that long and hard. He would have us go out and try to sell as much as possible even if it meant lying. It meant twisting the truth so it seemed better. It meant not telling the whole truth. There are all things that can help you win. But I hate that way.
I would rather be poor than get rich lying to people. So I quit that field after about 5 months.
I want to say most lawyers (well at least most that I know). Are all about winning. So with no regards to what is right and wrong. That have to argue for a side that might not even be right. And they do WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN.
Personally i think WHATEVER IT TAKES TO WIN is for sellouts. Morals are very important in life. But that quality is lacking in some people.
I like that! We had a good lawyer here....still good...who represented a man accused of murdering an elementary school teacher in her home. The defense lawyer chose a strategy of blaming the ex- boyfriend and not the current boyfriend. Although the ex-boyfriend was another teacher and the break up was amicable, the new boyfriend had a violent criminal history of rapes/assaults and other violence that the teacher/victim did not know about. He also had priors of fleeing and fighting police. The jury could hear none of this, as it would prejudice their view of the defendant. They found him not guilty. Mind you the young woman was bound, gagged, and stabbed several times with a knife...in the same manner as his prior cases and his blood and DNA was found at the scene. He claimed he had consensual bondage sex and left...the new boyfriend must have done it.
He was released and within 4 months, he killed another person as he robbed him at gunpoint. In that case, there were 2 witnesses who saw him and other evidence so he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. The defendant's parents had to sell their home to pay the lawyer on the first case. Since he had no money left, that same lawyer would not represent him in court; he was later found guilty.
Could you sleep at night knowing you got a guilty client off and then not representing him later as he had no money? Could you sleep good at night knowing you got a murderer off? It's all about the $$ and a second victim had to die because of that a%%hole. That's just one reason people hate lawyers!
Did his lawyer do a good job?