|
|
|
| Authored by: PJ on Monday, October 01 2012 @ 12:52 PM EDT |
Right. You want folks who don't know one thing
about the law to write your laws.
Think, man. Think. Ignorance is not a noble
qualifiction for a job that requires knowledge.
It's like saying software developers should
only be allowed to be housewives who've never
taken a computer class.
Congress writes laws. That's the job in a
nutshell.
The problem isn't the knowledge. The problem
is the money that works any way the owners
point it.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: knarf on Monday, October 01 2012 @ 04:33 PM EDT |
Well, no, that would not work. There is a place for those who studied law in the
design and implementation of law. What is needed is oversight, something to keep
things from running out of hand. Something to make sure the laws are written and
implemented in such a way that they benefit society as a whole.
Take the report about abolishing the whole patent system as an example. The
authors of that report claim that patent systems generally lead to less
innovation and more stagnation. They make a case for abolishing patents. In the
current system they have a snowball's chance in hell to actually see their ideas
implemented since there is too much money involved in keeping the patent system
alive. Money is influence is power.
What is more powerful than money? In theory the US constitution should trump any
amount of money, and the constitution has certain things to say about the
reasons for implementing patent laws. It should be clear by now that the current
situation has nothing to do with the original intent of those patent laws. Is it
possible to get the powers that be test a whole legal framework against the
constitution, and decide that that framework no longer serves its purpose and
should therefore be abolished? Not just reformed, but abolished? Does the
supreme court have this power? If they do, how can they be nudged in the right
direction? Who stands to gain by upholding the constitution? Society as a whole
would benefit, but society as a whole does not give campaign contributions.
To be honest, I don't really see how this dilemma can be resolved other than by
having people with true intentions in the right places who are strong enough to
ignore the pressure of moneyed interests. Those people have been seen in
politics but they often seem to fall victim to strange accidents or
assassinations (of character or of person) or other mishaps which displace them
from their positions of power.
---
[ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur
et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
