It seems to me that this thread is just one giant flame post, I guess the
laws of this forum dictate that some of the posts in this thread are breaking the rules, and should be dealt with accordingly.
not-that-bright said:
Is this the accountant that hates lawyers? He seems like a toss, I saw his sig tho and just thought he was some ranting first year 'commy' law student.
I don't know where you got the idea that I'm a commerce student from, and even then if you had have read Frigids post you probably could have ascertained that I am indeed a science student. I guess you're not all that bright (lol, what a pun).
Now, as for the purpose of that signiture, it was not intended to insult the Faculty of law of any university. No, rather it's merely meant to point out that our current system (the one all you people are studying) of law, in any country is flawed. If you walk past the entrance to the Library Stage 2 entrance at UNSW I believe it's quite a struggle to find any quote that points out the flaws in the law. I could be wrong, I only walk past there twice a week usually, but as of yet I've only seen pro-law quotes. I suppose that's all you can expect from a faculty that studies it. I wouldn't expect the Faculty of Science to have a bunch of quotes knocking science, but that quote board is far too biased for my liking.
the verdict is given by the arbiter of guilt, the jury, not by lawyers. moreover, if the dove is indeed innocent, then it must have been a miscarriage of justice, leading to a mistrial.
Is that to say a dove has never been wrongly convicted? Once again, it's just offering another viewpoint of our beloved system of law. Of course, that's a rarity, but it does happen.
first, the bulk of 'laws' nowadays are made by the very same responsible and representative government we as citizens vote in and trust. second, the harshness of the common law has long been ameliorated by equitable principles.
I certainly didn't vote them in, nor do I trust them at the state or federal level. Second, there are still points within the law (a rapist getting 10 years or whatever, and then getting 3 years for every offence after that?) that are indeed the severest injustices of all (apart from maybe the death penalty). These injustices are the biggest problems with the law, and the judges that were once law students like yourselves.
Ahh d/w frigy he's just a bit cranky because he lost the argument in the bitch thread he made
Go get me a neutral party who has no history on this board and ask them to examine who 'won' the argument. I thought it was fairly even to be honest.
Where better to crusade against the study of law and its ends, than in a forum populated by law students?
The blind law student believes that BOS is populated in the majority by law students? Alas, I did give a reason for putting that signiture here - I could go and buy a piece of glass, write quotes on it and put it up near the library stage 2 entrance if I wanted to and had money, however the current way I'm doing it is cheaper and is attracting more attention than I thought it would get. I mean, it's even got it's own thread? Oooh controversy.
I honestly don't see what you're trying to achieve, Nebuchadnezzar. Do you think that we'll see your vitriol and suddenly think 'holy shit! The law is a complete bitch!', withdraw from our studies, and dedicate our lives to composing poetry? Or rather, do you expect all the other members of this site to see your argument, think 'this Nebuchadnezzar chap really knows the score. I'm glad he warned me about the law and all those who study it, because boy-howdy, I never would have known how bad it was!', crown you their king, and stage a protest in George St against 'the law' after burning down the Downing Centre?
First and foremost, I'd like to enlighten you as to the fact that there is no letter 'd' in my username. Putting a 'd' in there does not make it seem like you have greater historical or theological knowledge regarding the origins of the name Nebuchadnezzar, of which my username is
based, not enirely copied from.
And no, that signiture is hardly meant to do that, as I said it's merely what could be considered my interpretation and rebuttal to the great quote board at UNSW.
Honestly, why are you even bothering to tell us how 'inferior' our degree program happens to be, and how much injustice the Daily Telegraph tells you is rife in our legal system?
I don't read the Daily Telegraph and quite frankly I consider it an insult for you to make those conclusions about my political and social preferences. I also don't believe I ever said your degree is inferior, I said it was useless in that everything that is written in the law should and is indeed common sense. In fact, there was once a man named John Mortimer who gave the quote "No brilliance is needed in the law. Nothing but common sense and relatively clean fingernails." How true that is, and it was said by an experienced law graduate who happens to be more experience in the field of law then any of you here. I'll take his word for it over yours, and hence that's why that part is in the signiture
Not true, I merely voice my opinion on all matters including the field of law. The idea of free speech is a concept that the public has fought for, for many hundreds of years and until the last few centuries it has been denied (and still is in some countries). Surely a liberal, intelligent, foward thinking law student like yourself has respect for the right of free speech, yeah?
Anyway, trolling is the idea of going somewhere to look for an argument. I:
a) Never came here looking to 'duke' it out with law students, contrary to what some of you may believe.
b) Only made my first negative comment toward the study of law at about my 70th post, and even then that post in the law building topic was not meant to be taken too seriously. It did escalate from there due to the efforts of Moonlight Sonata and Frigid, and hence is it not they who are guilty of trolling?
c) Added this signiture a few months after our loving debacle was over, not to capture their attention and start this thread, but to simply add something new to my signiture that had a few sentiments of mine in there, expressed in a way that is critical of both the law and the entrance to library stage 2. I rarely see any law students on this forum and the fact that it's gotten it's own thread without being seen in a new post within a law forum here is quite astounding.
lol, he's free to say whateva the hell he wishes, although u r too.
Indeed I am, although this particular law student doesn't seem to enjoy the idea of free speech. Let us hope that he never gains a position of great power in society.
----
Maybe I should go to that presentation by Michael Kirby, and sit there quietly and listen to what he has to say. I have no qualms in admitting that he's most porbably a much better aurator and philosopher than I am and perhaps a presentation by him would enlighten me on the idea of law. I guess I'd have to wear a wig or something so no-one recognises me, for the purpose of protecting myself from angry law students.
