|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you hate lawyers? |
| Yes, I do |
|
24% |
[ 7 ] |
| I dislike many/most of them, but I don't *hate* lawyers |
|
27% |
[ 8 ] |
| I only dislike some/a few of them, but it is a large profession |
|
6% |
[ 2 ] |
| No, I do not |
|
41% |
[ 12 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 29 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 9:29 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| wannago wrote: |
I do, however, despise civil lawyers. |
Wannago, you should know that there are many different types of 'civil' lawyers and solicitors providing invaluable services. I have many latino friends and I know people from places such as Thailand and Vietnam looking for green cards and PR status. They needed to find immigration lawyers to help them navigate them around all the laws and regulations to realize that goal. Point being, is that there are many different types of civil lawyers, everything from immigration law to insurance law to construction law, that provide tremendous and very needed services.
I don't hate all lawyers. I just hate the opportunistic ones preying on others who don't know any better. Although that can be said of any profession, white collared ones in particular.
Last edited by Pluto on Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:34 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moosehead
Joined: 05 May 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
I do not hate lawyers. We all do the jobs we picked.
My uncle (a lawyer) says one of the best reasons to become a lawyer is so that you never have to deal with one. |
so what did you just make that up or something??
lawyers pretty much deal with lawyers all day all night all week all year all month long - they hang out together, sleep together marry each other, probably go to h*ll and back together -  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Make it up? Thanks for asking, but no.
He was referring to the shumk who ends up in a divorce case or the business owner with a "slip and fall" claim against his store. Paying astronomical fees to prevent a shake down wouldn't be fun.
Did you know that emoitcons are for:
1) People who suffer an inability to express their feelings/thoughts with words and
2) Tweens (and Catholic Priests trying to pick up tweens) trying to be cute on the internet.
Which are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
I do, however, despise civil lawyers. If a normal person is slapped with some civil lawsuit and has no money to pay a lawyer, they are screwed. Your only option apart from paying someone exorbitant amounts of money to walk you through the proceedings, is to represent yourself. |
Erm . . . homeowner's insurance. The normal person can get homeowner's insurance (or auto for auto accidents). The insurance company will pay the judgment or defend you.
Or bankruptcy. If you have wealth, you should get some homeowner's insurance. If you don't have anything, a civil lawyer can't collect from your poverty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some of us have probably lived in places that lacked America's deeply-ingrained sense of civil liability and mapractice, personal-injury compensation, and consumers' rights and products liability, etc.
For these things, for the security that comes with them, not to mention multiple other benefits, like truth-in-advertising, we can and should thank aggressive trial lawyers -- and not merely our laws and codes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| wannago wrote: |
I do, however, despise civil lawyers. If a normal person is slapped with some civil lawsuit and has no money to pay a lawyer, they are screwed. Your only option apart from paying someone exorbitant amounts of money to walk you through the proceedings, is to represent yourself. |
Erm . . . homeowner's insurance. The normal person can get homeowner's insurance (or auto for auto accidents). The insurance company will pay the judgment or defend you.
Or bankruptcy. If you have wealth, you should get some homeowner's insurance. If you don't have anything, a civil lawyer can't collect from your poverty. |
Wow Kuros, you are well on your way!
What about those nasty divorces or the child custody proceedings that often stem from them. Any insurance for those?
What if I feel I have been unjustly canned from a non-union job? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| wannago wrote: |
I do, however, despise civil lawyers. If a normal person is slapped with some civil lawsuit and has no money to pay a lawyer, they are screwed. Your only option apart from paying someone exorbitant amounts of money to walk you through the proceedings, is to represent yourself. |
Erm . . . homeowner's insurance. The normal person can get homeowner's insurance (or auto for auto accidents). The insurance company will pay the judgment or defend you.
Or bankruptcy. If you have wealth, you should get some homeowner's insurance. If you don't have anything, a civil lawyer can't collect from your poverty. |
Wow Kuros, you are well on your way!
What about those nasty divorces or the child custody proceedings that often stem from them. Any insurance for those?
What if I feel I have been unjustly canned from a non-union job? |
Don't want a nasty divorce? Don't marry a woman who will divorce you, and don't cheat on your wife. Want to guarantee that you'll never have a divorce? Don't get married.
If you want to lay the nastiness of divorce proceedings at the hands of divorce lawyers, you are *beyond* naive. At Career Day, even some family law lawyers cautioned us about family law. A few others had practiced family law before and they warned us in stark terms. Divorce lawyers are pitied by other lawyers. Are you starting to understand?
As to the second hypothetical, let me just remind you that America is an at-will employment nation. Unions alone can protect you. If you have a non-union job and your boss doesn't have you on contract, then you (I'm assuming you're a white male) are shit out of luck.
The same goes for most pension schemes. If the company has offered you a pension, it can almost always choose to end it, unless its part of a contract.
You can hate lawyers all you want, but I believe your real beef may be with the system and the law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Don't want a nasty divorce? Don't marry a woman who will divorce you, and don't cheat on your wife. Want to guarantee that you'll never have a divorce? Don't get married. |
Ah, now we're in the lawyer-speak zone.
| Quote: |
| If you want to lay the nastiness of divorce proceedings at the hands of divorce lawyers, you are *beyond* naive. At Career Day, even some family law lawyers cautioned us about family law. A few others had practiced family law before and they warned us in stark terms. Divorce lawyers are pitied by other lawyers. Are you starting to understand? |
You're damned right I lay the nastiness of divorce proceedings at the hands of divorce lawyers. Look, I have had friends (and to a much more limited extent, myself) who have experienced divorces fueled by the nasty, dirty tricks of some slime-ball attorney looking for extra money. You can certainly call me naive, but the fact remains that lawyers are the ones driving the difficulty of divorces. And, please, don't give me the sob story about family and divorce lawyers. They don't deserve pity mainly because they bring their difficulties and reputations on themselves.
| Quote: |
As to the second hypothetical, let me just remind you that America is an at-will employment nation. Unions alone can protect you. If you have a non-union job and your boss doesn't have you on contract, then you (I'm assuming you're a white male) are *beep* out of luck.
|
Exactly. We agree on something.
| Quote: |
| You can hate lawyers all you want, but I believe your real beef may be with the system and the law. |
Well, look, hate is a bit strong for the feelings I have toward attorneys in general. As others have pointed out, not all attorneys are scum...but it seems the profession has more than its fair share. Of course this is my observation from personal experience and from the experiences of some people close to me.
At the end of the day, my beef IS with the system...but lawyers are an integral part of the system. Anyone not part of the club must pay exorbitant amounts of money to play...and sometimes you have no choice but to play. This is NOT like do-it-yourself plumbing that goes bad and you have to call in a professional plumber; this deals with people and their lives and happiness. A civil suit can last for years and have far-reaching ramifications. I guess I have a problem with someone that charges $250/hour for someone else's misery when those people whose jobs are essential to society (cops, teachers, etc.) are paid peanuts. Do you understand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In many years of practicing law in Canada one almost uiversal observation was that the people that hate lawyers the most are the quickest to hire one when they get into trouble.
Here is an ethical question:
A lawyer who represents a criminal client is told by the client, subject to solicitor client privelege, where the body of the child he killed is. Can he in order to soothe the minds of the grieving parents give that information to the authorities?
The answer is no!
Why?
Because the priviledge belongs to the client, not to the lawyer.
I can also say that in "slip and fall case" a lawyer will seldom, if ever, sue a poor client. Too much work, to much risk and little return. Now if an insurance company with deep pockets (insurance companies); go for it!
If the very worst of criminals or people generally cannot get legal assitance, then the very best of us are in trouble |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| I lay the nastiness of divorce proceedings at the hands of divorce lawyers. Look, I have had friends (and to a much more limited extent, myself) who have experienced divorces fueled by the nasty, dirty tricks of some slime-ball attorney looking for extra money... |
I studied family law under a retired judge and former family-law atty who had once fired a client, a woman seeking divorce and sole custody of her child. She was losing her case and not interested in compromising with her husband for reasons I cannot remember. Late in the procedings, she approached my former teacher and informed him that she now remembered that her husband had molested her child and she wanted to state that allegation in court.
He told me that he understood exactly what she intended and that he considered it a transparent lie. He parted company with her that week. She apparently found a new lawyer who was willing to (re)state her case on her new terms. But that is beside the point.
Your harsh feelings and repeating anti-lawyer stereotypes cannot account for such diversity as this within the legal profession. My former teacher, incidentally, happens to remain one of the most important role-models I have encountered so far in my life. Calm, clear-headed, dispassionate. A realist willing to do the right thing without needing to preach about doing the right thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Don't want a nasty divorce? Don't marry a woman who will divorce you, and don't cheat on your wife. Want to guarantee that you'll never have a divorce? Don't get married. |
I agree. Many people put themselves in very bad and expensive situations by making promises that they are unable to keep. Marriage is not for everybody, it seems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Your harsh feelings and repeating anti-lawyer stereotypes cannot account for such diversity as this within the legal profession. My former teacher, incidentally, happens to remain one of the most important role-models I have encountered so far in my life. Calm, clear-headed, dispassionate. A realist willing to do the right thing without needing to preach about doing the right thing. |
I know, and have stated, that not all lawyers are slime, but I would say your teacher is more the exception rather than the rule.
Anti-lawyer stereotypes are out there, and believed by many, because they are, to a large extent, true. Its kind of the same with used-car salesmen.
I am happy for you that this teacher is a good role-model in your life. The fact remains that, despite all the lawyer shows that used to be in vogue on TV where lawyers were painted as virtuous, caring professionals, your average attorney is only interested in one thing: and its not justice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| ...your average attorney is only interested in one thing: and its not justice. |
Again: stereotype. Somewhat justified, of course. Who could deny its partial validity with a straight face? This notwithstanding, you rely on stereotype more than any actual, rational measurement of jurists and their interests.
By the way, show me any group that is purely interested in justice or good and I will reveal them as a clever group that know how to mask their interests...That is, it seems unfair to single out and punish attorneys for being like everybody else: self-interested. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| wannago wrote: |
| ...your average attorney is only interested in one thing: and its not justice. |
Again: stereotype. Somewhat justified, of course. Who could deny its partial validity with a straight face? This notwithstanding, you rely on stereotype more than any actual, rational measurement of jurists and their interests. |
No, I rely on what I've experienced personally and upon the experiences of those whose judgement I respect.
| Quote: |
| By the way, show me any group that is purely interested in justice or good and I will reveal them as a clever group that know how to mask their interests...That is, it seems unfair to single out and punish attorneys for being like everybody else: self-interested. |
Yes, but very few groups tout themselves as virtuous and and almost above reproach as do the lawyers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wannago wrote: |
| [. I guess I have a problem with someone that charges $250/hour for someone else's misery when those people whose jobs are essential to society (cops, teachers, etc.) are paid peanuts. Do you understand? |
So what should they charge? Less than cost and bankrupt themselves? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
