Good stuff Ms Skeptic Claw. Yer on the right track here!

In another life I would have been a lawyer. But in this life I’m just a very frustrated person as result of the most glaring examples of regulators playing up! They assert particular points of law and then fail to regulate them in anything like an efficient or fair manner. They fail to be interested when I make complaints about law infringements. They effectively teach us underlings that the written law is not the law and that something different really applies, despite continuing to assert vocally that the law does apply as written. Aaaargh!! (:> 0

I am particularly affected by this with the police regarding road safety law and with the code of conduct and other rules in my workplace!

<< Nor do I think that the presence of discretion on the part of regulators is necessarily a bad thing, as long as there are appropriate checks and balances to ensure that it is not misused. >>

Agreed. But this discretion has got to be written into the law. If the law states something in black and white terms then a regulator should not have the right to turn a blind eye to some infringements while bearing down heavily on people over others or letting some people go scot-free while copping others for just the same infringement.

We can’t have a situation, which is evident with the policing of many road rules for example, where the police turn a blind eye to minor infringements of all sorts, thus leading the public to understand that lots of things are not policed at face value, and then have a blitz and bust people who don’t observe the absolute letter of the law.

The fostering of a respectful relationship between citizens and regulators is all-important. But when this happens, good drivers get alienated by the cops and general respect for the law suffers accordingly.

Law has literally become a pointless waste of the paper it is printed on. What's the point of adhering to the law when it only gets you into trouble & yet a useless crim in the Public Service for example gets stood down on full pay. I wish I could think of a way of getting twelve months off on full pay till some smart & corrupt lawyer outwits some mutt of a judge & proves me innocent & rewards me compensation on top of it. Yeah, a great legal system we have. Juvenile delinquents get apprenticeships as part of "rehabilitation" while good kids can't get a job. The Police ? They're there to enforce the law on the decent & innocent.

What are the limits of the law? What can it change and what it can’t? Who enforces the law? How people react to the law?

Before advancing in this line of questioning shouldn’t we try to find out who is the lawmaker?

Who does he/she want to control?

Why want he/she want to control others?

And who gives to the lawmaker the authority to impose his/her law?

And if the case for controlling people is made, how far into the life of people does the law maker want to intrude?

Would the door of a man’s or woman’s hut be a boundary to the law? Or, the lawmaker insists to intrude further, penetrate their thoughts and direct their actions?

Dear Ph.D. aspirant, be kind to yourself and those who bother to read your utterances.

‘Thinking before writing’ would be a good law to impose on oneself.

I think there should be a law against writing opinions for OLO in a pseudonym. I can understand that people have usernames etc for commenting. But surely you can write an opinion piece in your own name and actually stand behind what you are saying.

Law.

Hired a tradie. Gave me a bill. Over charged. Went to Fair Trading. He had broken the law in other areas that were not part of the dispute but would have been disclosed in Fair Trading Tribunal so he faced losing license. I just wanted a few grand knocked off bill. I was selling house. Soon as sold he placed a caveat on property. I was under contract then with buyer. Fair Trading said this pre-empted my claim as now would be supreme court matter. He would have done anything to avoid Fair Trading. Saw a lawyer, he said I needed a barister. I said why, just a minor bill dispute. Barrister quoted me $10,000. I was disputing like 2. He said just pay it, cheaper. So we have a builder not chargeing GST, not offering a contract for work over $1,000 and illegally placing a caveat on my property. I wondered why he would pay a barrister (though think he was pro-bono?) until I got a brand new bill. A $3.5 grand bill now as $13,000. So add fraud.

SO now we have builder not charging GST.
Not offering contract for work over $1,000.
Illegally placing caveat on property.
Fraudently changing invoices (provable)
However now with mythical amount not offering Builders insurance. (which was his major undoing)

Judge did not wat to know about, not important enough and we chased out fo court to settle.

So tell me that is not a farce.

Every court in the nation knew he had broken the law but off scott free. Dodgy builder free to terrorise yet again as he apparently has done on more than 5 occasions by his own admission.

But wait there is more. Why did the Land office accept the caveat? Oh because you have the right to appeal in the Supreme Court ?

Joke, total joke. Property laywer, you would understand I am sure.

signed

Mrs Jennings

<< What's the point of adhering to the law when it only gets you into trouble… >>

Good question Indi.

As it pertains to my concern about road rules; if you fastidiously observe speed limits and many other rules, you become a hazard and you increase the chances of mishap for yourself, because you are driving in a different manner to everyone else and many people are just intolerant of that!

This is bloody awful. But what is even more awful is that when I talk to the police, Main Roads, RACQ and local councils about it, they either don’t get it or don’t give a hoot!

The same applies if you observe the letter of the law with respect to the code of conduct in my workplace. You are put at a disadvantage. You are pressured to break the rules. You have to deal with people who both break the rules with impunity and tell you that you have to observe them.

---

David, there is a rule on the Agmates forum that prohibits posters from registering under a ‘spewdonym’. I post there a lot and find myself in strong disagreement with quite a few people. Some people obviously have a seething intolerance of divergent views. I wonder how long it will be before I get a rock though the window?

Writing under your real name is not always advisable.