Wife's nude pics on lost phone end up online

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I know you're being somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but that's actually how the current system that you're railing against works - that cost is included in every burger (and Norelco razor, and monthly daycare payment, and...).



I think you actually gave the 'correct' answer earlier: no one can really come up with a better system. If I heard one, I'd be down for it - but I've never heard one.

I acknowledge that I can't back this up very well, but I still think it would be better for our perception of being responsible for ourselves not to have the pay out connected to some corporation say 5% responsible when the dumbass himself is say 20% responsible.

Sure, we can spread the corporate cost out to the rest of us through other means, but there's still a suggestion of actual responsibility by the company and therefore a suggestion that we aren't mainly responsible for ourselves. And I don't know if this comes out in the societal wash or not.

(Now, I don't really know how my general fund idea encourages individual responsibility better since it probably would require the government to act on our behalf.)

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I acknowledge that I can't back this up very well, but I still think it would be better for our perception of being responsible for ourselves not to have the pay out connected to some corporation say 5% responsible when the dumbass himself is say 20% responsible.

As per the latter part first, KSK did a good job discussing the comparative negligence consequences - I don't know if you live in a CF% state, and the rules vary state-to-state, but that deals with quite a bit of what you're looking at.

As per the first part, I don't know how to reconcile that with decades of evidence that the 'deterrent' effect of laws or potential punishment varies from quite low to nonexistent.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

As per the latter part first, KSK did a good job discussing the comparative negligence consequences - I don't know if you live in a CF% state, and the rules vary state-to-state, but that deals with quite a bit of what you're looking at.

As per the first part, I don't know how to reconcile that with decades of evidence that the 'deterrent' effect of laws or potential punishment varies from quite low to nonexistent.

Yeah, and if a lot of the problem is actually with media shaped misunderstanding of actual legal trends, it's hard to argue that changing the actual law will correct it.

I will say I still don't like it, and we all know how valuable that it.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Yeah, and if a lot of the problem is actually with media shaped misunderstanding of actual legal trends, it's hard to argue that changing the actual law will correct it.

Honestly, putting aside the media thing, I just don't think many people want to understand the legal process at that specific level unless they've been involved in a lawsuit or are a member of a law-related field. There's just not a lot of reason why someone (outside of those in law-related employment and those involved in lawsuits) would want to know that much information.

It's the same thing, in my mind, as knowing about the legislative process. It's not a bad thing to know, but at the same time the public is very much results-oriented and doesn't care about or wants to ignore the process.

That's obviously painting things with broad brush strokes, so take it as you will...

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Honestly, putting aside the media thing, I just don't think many people want to understand the legal process at that specific level unless they've been involved in a lawsuit or are a member of a law-related field. There's just not a lot of reason why someone (outside of those in law-related employment and those involved in lawsuits) would want to know that much information.

It's the same thing, in my mind, as knowing about the legislative process. It's not a bad thing to know, but at the same time the public is very much results-oriented and doesn't care about or wants to ignore the process.

That's obviously painting things with broad brush strokes, so take it as you will...

I preface this by saying, I'm not anti-lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, but some of what makes it hard to follow is the efforts of lawyers and legal language. We need an entire devoted, specified, occupational class of folks to deal with it, and I'm not sure that's a pure coincidence.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I preface this by saying, I'm not anti-lawyer by any stretch of the imagination, but some of what makes it hard to follow is the efforts of lawyers and legal language. We need an entire devoted, specified, occupational class of folks to deal with it, and I'm not sure that's a pure coincidence.

I see where you're going, and I don't agree, but I don't want to hijack the thread. I will say, though, that not every legislator (i.e. the people who actually make the laws) is a lawyer, so we have to be careful how far we stretch this idea of it not being a "pure coincidence."

If you want to discuss it further feel free to PM me, as I don't want to take away from the central point of the thread.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I see where you're going, and I don't agree, but I don't want to hijack the thread. I will say, though, that not every legislator (i.e. the people who actually make the laws) is a lawyer, so we have to be careful how far we stretch this idea of it not being a "pure coincidence."

If you want to discuss it further feel free to PM me, as I don't want to take away from the central point of the thread.

I wasn't going to stretch it beyond that. I don't think we have a legal system designed for understanding by non-lawyers. I'm not trying to suggest nefarious intent on the part of lawyers, but I think there's some cause and effect rather than pure coincidence. As legal fields and legal study get more specialized, I think the law gets further and further away from the experience of non-lawyers. That's all.