Lawyer bashing on CD

[Adam Y.]

So, what gives? Why do we act in this way with regard to lawyers, and what can be done to bring an end to it? Or is the stereotype a valuable illustration as to how not to look at the rules? I'm not sure. I do know that I cringe every time someone brings up "lawyerism" or some other such nonsense as the reason their interpretation of the rules is right.

In all honesty I think it has to do with the fact that people consider lawyers to be slightly higher than telemarketers.

Gates is not one of us - he never got a degree in anything, and he not an engineer

I don't think Dean Kamen never got a real degree. That doesn't make him any less of an engineer.

[Rafi A]

no he didn't ever get a real degree, but he did receive honorary degrees from many educational institutes.
Personally, I'm all for following the spirit of a rule/law vs. the text. Although in a debate round I might say other wise

[KenWittlief]

lawyers have earned the reputation they have - it didnt land on them for no reason.

In every lawsuit or trail you have a lawyer 'defending' the guilty or loosing position - think about it -how often do you see a guilty person plead guilty?

lawyers consider it their job to get the best possible judgement for their client - doenst matter if their client is wrong, guilty or at fault.

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

lawyers have earned the reputation they have - it didnt land on them for no reason.

Even if this were true, it still wouldn't justify a stereotype used across the whole profession. To use some familiar language, how many decent, hardworking lawyers are you willing to offend?

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

In every lawsuit or trail you have a lawyer 'defending' the guilty or loosing position

That's what the lawsuit or trial is for, to determine which position is right. If everyone knew how it was going to end ahead of time, well, then, the whole process would be a lot easier.

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

lawyers consider it their job to get the best possible judgement for their client - doenst matter if their client is wrong, guilty or at fault.

It is a lawyer's job to get the best possible judgement for their client. That's what the client pays them to do. That's what you or I would pay our lawyer to do if either of us were falsely (or even rightly) accused of a crime.

That's what the sixth amendment to our Constitution guarantees us:

Originally Posted by Hancock, et al

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

[MikeDubreuil]

Engineers can be just as unethical as lawyers. Sure, it's more often than not indirect. For instance, a lot of people in this forum will or currently work for a defense company; engineering the next fighter jet, automatic assault weapon or bomb.

The fruits of their labor are usually used responsibly and for the correct reasons. Unfortunately, they can also be used to kill civilians accidentally or purposefully when they end up on the black market.

Not every engineer creates insulin pumps or better wheel chairs, some create better methods for killing people.

To wrap things up, engineers are no better than lawyers; often we do good, but sometimes we do bad.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by Pixel_Perfect

no he didn't ever get a real degree, but he did receive honorary degrees from many educational institutes.
Personally, I'm all for following the spirit of a rule/law vs. the text. Although in a debate round I might say other wise

Dean Kamen never got his degree because he was too busy running his business and BEING an engineer

Gates never got his degree cause he was too busy buying someone else work (Dos 1.0) and selling it to IBM.

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Dean Kamen never got his degree because he was too busy running his business and BEING an engineer

Gates never got his degree cause he was too busy buying someone else work (Dos 1.0) and selling it to IBM.

It seems by your quote that engineers are more worthy people than others, like businessmen. What makes the engineering better than other careers?

I hope I'm misunderstanding you.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by SilverStar

It seems by your quote that engineers are more worthy people than others, like businessmen. What makes the engineering better than other careers?

I hope I'm misunderstanding you.

I have devoted the last 24 years of my life to being an engineer, and being the best engineer I can

so obviously I feel this is the best profession choice for me (or I would be doing something else)

everyone has their own unique gifts and talents, and has to find their own place in the world

does that mean that people in one profession are more worthy than others?

Im not sure what you mean by worthy, but ask yourself - with regards to professions, which ones come to mind when you think of

noble, honorable, professional, admirable

and which ones when you think of people who are

sleazy, underhanded, slimy, crafty, sneaky, dispicable....

or how about

greedy, profiteering, ambitious, selfserving...

we all have our own preconceived notions on which professions tend to draw or attract which type of people, right?

there is a whole universe of information out there. we would not be able to function if we did not try to sort and catigorize it, to make generalizations that are accurate on some level

that doesnt mean there arent exceptions

[Yan Wang]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Im not sure what you mean by worthy, but ask yourself - with regards to professions, which ones come to mind when you think of

noble, honorable, professional, admirable

KNIGHTS!

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Dean Kamen never got his degree because he was too busy running his business and BEING an engineer

Gates never got his degree cause he was too busy buying someone else work (Dos 1.0) and selling it to IBM.

Bill Gates was a prelaw (maybe that's why you don't like him) student at Harvard. He dropped out in his junior year so he could concentrate on making BASIC interpreters for Microsoft, the company he founded the year earlier. Dean also dropped out in his junior year, also to run a business.

Bill Gates and Paul Allen wrote a simulator for the 8008, which they then modified to simulated the 8080 used in the Altair. Then, they wrote a BASIC interpreter that ran on their simulator. All this was without ever touching an Altair. When they finally got their hands on an Altair, the code worked fine. To do this, without ever touching hardware takes a level of software engineering (or genius) that most people don't have.


In Dean's earlier speeches, he often said that his goal was to make Bill Gates as much of people's hero as Michael Jordan. I'm pretty sure that Dean respects Bill Gates.

I know you don't like Bill Gates (I don't like much of microsoft's current software, nor some of their business dealings) but to say what you said, without anything to back you up, borders on slander.

Edit: a lawyer-to-be just PMed me and said it's libel not slander, since it's written.

[Jessica Boucher]

I've read this thread a couple of times, and I've been asked to say something, but I don't know what to really say...but I can see that it's getting kind of heated. Can we bring it back to the original topic of the thread?

Why do we act in this way with regard to lawyers, and what can be done to bring an end to it? Or is the stereotype a valuable illustration as to how not to look at the rules? I'm not sure. I do know that I cringe every time someone brings up "lawyerism" or some other such nonsense as the reason their interpretation of the rules is right.

[AzNiCe]

why do we regard lawyers in this way? in the US it seems to me that the richer guy with the better lawyer wins, and the better lawyer seems to be the smoother-talking one who can find the loophole. i know this obviously doesnt apply to the majority of lawyers but i have no idea how to correct this.

but before we go on, id just like to say that lawyers are paid to do their jobs, and their jobs are to win cases.

[Mr. Ivey]

There are two kinds of lawyers, good and bad. The good ones protect and defend the innocent much like the police, fire fighters, and the armed forces, yet they do it in a court. These lawyers defend people who are accused of things they didn't do, or help fight for people's rights. They take up the cause of single mothers with children, against the dead beat dads, the keep children away from predators, and they fight for the rights of equality. And they never make the morning headlines nor do they make the 6 o'clock news. They are do gooders, they don't cause scandal or upset. The bad ones do. These guys bend the rules so much that if Dean says this is stratteling the line, they will find a loop hole somewhere, somehow. They are Johnny Cockren, and Mark Garragos, the represent those that you know have done wrong, yet the whezile into the minds of the people that you can not convict just because of a small piece of otherwise inconclusive evidence. And this is why layers are bashed. It only takes a few bad apples to spoil the whole bunch, or in the case of lawyers, ther reputation to society. You see when someone uses an annology of a lawyer they are not taking into consideration the Ken Pacciccacos of the word (Ken is the parent of a good friend of mine, he got arson charges droped from a young boy who was only involved because his brother was driving the car, and he was not old enough to drive, nor did he know what was going on). Nor are the Bob Rices considered, who fight for justice, and for free helped my mom and grandpa settle the assets of my grandmother when she passed. When the term lawyer is put into context in some of the posts mentioned, you are more substituting the term for the correct term of stickler of the rules, one who can not see in grey, it's either black or white. In some ways some lawyers have tainted their profession by defending the not so innocent, but go down to a local court house and go to the juviniale and domestic relations cases, there you will find men and women with a heart of gold, people that fight for what is right. Not bottom feeders that we so commonly associate with the term of lawyer. This is just my rant on lawyer bashing. I see it as not saying a lawyer is the target, but an alternate name for a target. I don't rightly know if that makes perfect sence, but I hope someone gets the gist of it.
ivey

[David66]

My best friend's father is a lawyer. He is a great person, with a HUGE heart for his community, his friends, and his family. But when it come to his profession, he ahs emntioned to me personally that he does "whatever it takes". It is impossible IMO to be a lawyer (at least a good one) without fitting into the stereotype sometimes. The laws of our United States of America were written vaguely for a reason. take say...the constitution for example. it was written over 200 years ago....how could they possibly know what types of needs and wants-both politically and socially- we would have today? Allthey had was the foresight to make sure laws were vague enough to be adapted to any social situation. laws are vague to protect the innocent. and the mostly innocent. and-unfortunately-sometimes the guilty. they were written to prevent tyranny. they were written to give us the freedoms we enjoy today. they were written by some of the 'best' lawyers. they may not have had the best profession in the world-and they may not have always been truthful-but they are good people. this applies to every profession. so i believe this 'lawyer bashing' isnt about bashing poeple who are lawyers, but ratehr the mentality it refers to. i believe FIRST is right in their want for us to avoid this mentality. it is the main reason that so many flags are being thrown. (ie, i wasnt hurting anyone in that corral-no you werent, but you WERE in it). They are promoting healthy PROFESSIONAL attitudes,because they know that we are all good people privately (we hope

[Ryan F.]

Okay, I would have to say it's pretty simple in my view. Lawyers are necessary to protect peoples rights. Next time your on trial (which I hightly doubt) and believe your being falsely accused, don't come back telling me that having a lawyer is a bad thing. The thing that sickens me is lawyers that defend people they know are guilty just to make money. OJ Simpson ring a bell to anyone? Also, the current fad of stupid cases such as suing fast food places for obesity sickens me. Lawyers are there for a reason, but some of them definetly go overboard just for the money.

Caution Coffee is HOT!