Which comes first Laws or Lawyers
-
The egg came first.
-
@Nic What if the egg was laid by another species?
-
I've always been of the position that lawyers interpret law, but do not make the law. However, in that process an evolution occurs: if a lawyer successfully conveys an interpretation of a law that is contradictory to the subject of the person who wrote it, it is often re-written. In that sense, the lawyer was party to changed law.
A judge can also make a law. There is no more judicial restraint in America. They're not bound by staying within the literal writings of laws like lawyers are, but they do take a lawyer's interpretation, sprinkle in some political activism, and boom, you have a new law.
In a lot of cases, laws are influenced before they're ever written. They exist in the air and on the tongues of lawyers, judges, politicians, everyone. The person who actually sits down to write it is honestly the least important person in the equation.
-
@Jstear said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Nic What if the egg was laid by another species?
The proto-chicken laid the first chicken egg due to a mutation, which then became the first chicken.
-
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Jstear said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Nic What if the egg was laid by another species?
The proto-chicken laid the first chicken egg due to a mutation, which then became the first chicken.
So sudo-lawyers wrote the first laws.
There-go lawyers created laws before laws existed.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Jstear said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Nic What if the egg was laid by another species?
The proto-chicken laid the first chicken egg due to a mutation, which then became the first chicken.
So sudo-lawyers wrote the first laws.
There-go lawyers created laws before laws existed.
Lawyers are far from super users.
-
@TAHIN said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
I've always been of the position that lawyers interpret law, but do not make the law.
That's correct. Every definition I know of says this.
However, in that process an evolution occurs: if a lawyer successfully conveys an interpretation of a law that is contradictory to the subject of the person who wrote it, it is often re-written. In that sense, the lawyer was party to changed law.
Party to, but not the changer. No more a party to than any person that argues against an existing law or points out flaws. A lawyer is a generic end user of the law in the context. The changer is still exclusively a politician. And the interpreter is still exclusively a judge.
-
In court law, politicians have no say. A judicial decision, made by interpreting current laws, creates a new law. It's one of the only beautiful things left in our judicial system. Then politicians try to create new laws to nullify it.
But that's off topic. So "Which came first, laws or lawyers?" Laws did. Just like English came before translators, video games came before cheat codes, and the computer came before the instruction manual.
-
Politicians make law
Lawyers/Judges interpret law.
This is executive vs judicial two different things, one makes law one does not.
-
@Jason said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
This is executive vs judicial two different things, one makes law one does not.
At the federal level... this is Congress makes all laws, Supreme Court interprets all laws.
-
If we include "natural law" then the laws pre-date the lawyers.
-
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
If we include "natural law" then the laws pre-date the lawyers.
Even if we don't.
-
Natural law predates the politicians.
Politicians predate man made laws.
Man made laws predate lawyers.
-
What about when head grok said "don't touch my mammoth burger" - is he the first politician? Or was that the first law sans politicians/lawyers?
-
Head Grok made a statement. Lowbie Grok found out what happened if he touched Grok's hamburger. Everybody listened to Grok next time he said something... That is why Grok is Chief.
-
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
What about when head grok said "don't touch my mammoth burger" - is he the first politician? Or was that the first law sans politicians/lawyers?
If you consider it a law, then yes, he'd be a politician. But would it be a law? That implies that laws are just threats and that politicians are just bullies.
Oh wait, I see your point.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
What about when head grok said "don't touch my mammoth burger" - is he the first politician? Or was that the first law sans politicians/lawyers?
If you consider it a law, then yes, he'd be a politician. But would it be a law? That implies that laws are just threats and that politicians are just bullies.
Oh wait, I see your point.
He does make a good one, don't he?
-
What about the pirate's code, where there are laws that are commonly recognized, but no rulers and no politicians? Anarchism.
-
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
What about the pirate's code, where there are laws that are commonly recognized, but no rulers and no politicians? Anarchism.
to be accepted they add to accept them. Someone acting as a polit had to do the accepting. What pirates worked without a leader?
-
@Nic said in Which comes first Laws or Lawyers:
What about the pirate's code, where there are laws that are commonly recognized, but no rulers and no politicians? Anarchism.
It's not really a code... It's more like... guidelines.
