What I Think Of The Legal System.

Promises… Promises. Our legal system is based on the basis of one keeping a promise. These promises are meant to be kept upon becoming a citizen, whether from the womb or other tricky situations involving comprehension of words to our National Anthem in a crowded room of accents. The conditions that one promises to are all the same, “Do you promise to follow the laws set forth by the millions of branches of governments, agencies, bald eagles, bourgeoisie, dinosaurs and green peace groups of the United States of America?” … “Yeah, Sure! I promise.”

“It should be noted that the mere promise to act is usually deemed valid consideration. Whether or not the promise is actually carried out is another matter…” (Essentials of Business Law, Liuzzo, Pg. 124-125)

In all actuality, our legal system is built on antiqued knowledge and amended through the years to keep current for our ever changing world and nation. It is enticing to see trials getting hot and heavy though, especially when they follow the shirt tails of acclaimed musicians in child molestation charges (too soon?). But then again, watching Average Joe’s getting sentenced in our infamous court of law or even Judge Judy is very unsettling, especially if Paris Hilton was just acquitted of the same charges last week. This just goes to show that if you have some sort of celebretorial-cloat you should be able to win over the preserved cavities of big wigs representing our legal system, with or without showing some skin.

It’s a joke. But this is the country that we choose to live in and this is the country that allows us the freedom to choose. I’m not saying that I’m choosing to take my under-age girlfriend across state lines, because obviously that’s not what they want me to choose… but rather the subtle choice between Starbucks or Dunkin, oh the joys of a Iced, Venti, Soy, Light Ice, Chai Tea Latte with two added shots of espresso, whipped cream and cinnamon on top. (No, I don’t really drink that, it’s the “choice” that counts.)

Myspace Hoax.

It’s a crazy “internet” that we all live in. I’m sure that a lot of us start our day by loading our tabs with multiple social networking sites, browse for updates, reply to crushes, and snoop over an unsuspecting past significant other. But in all this, how much of what we do online is honest browsing? Or should I say, how much of what everyone else online is doing is completely honest and moral?

The Myspace Hoax of November 2007 involves a young girl, a pair of vicious enemies, and a fictitious flirt. A boy seemed to have appeared by Immaculate Conception over the wired streets of Silicon Valley. This boy tended to the emotional needs of a young girl, Megan Meier, who was sought out by a rivaling peer and her mother, Lori Drew. The Drew pairing created this boy, Joshua Evans, to become romantically involved with young Meier, so that they could attack her previous emotional struggles with ADD and Depression. The two immoral saps, sustained the romance on long enough when suddenly “breaking up” with Meier…thus, leading Meier, to her suicide.

I find this to be a very disturbing and immoral act. Drew, whose daughter was Meier’s peer, should have known better then to act on young, teenage angst. Not only did she mingle with this imbalance of hormones, but she pushed it to the point where a young girl had no place else to turn. Because of Drew, a young girl is dead. Sadly, she is not being charged with Meier’s suicide, but rather to the computer fraud charges brought forth against MySpace’s User Terms and Agreements (who reads that stuff anyway?)... She’ll luckily only be spending three years in prison, probation and up to $5,000 fine. Good for her. Hopefully somebody doesn’t decorate a gun with flowers, shoot Drew in the face and only risk getting sued by the artificial flower company for not using silk flowers, instead of plastic.

What I Think About Lawyers.

Lawyers. There’s a lot that most people may say about lawyers, some good, some bad. Honestly… I think lawyers are a stereotyped group of wonderful people. I have a lot of love for these folks that risk their moral ethics every day to make a few dollars. They are the constitutional whores of America. I do agree that some of them out there do it all for the good. But in EVERY instance, case, trial, shindig, carnival, circus… whatever you want to call it that goes down in the court room, there is a lawyer defending the “good guy” and a lawyer defending the “bad guy.” Obviously one of them is guilty, but by the cunning ways of a certain suave lawyer… somebody is proven innocent. Ah, the joys of our judicial system! The laws of society, the ethics of our people, and the protection of those that are wise enough to seek out the loop holes.

I find the sharade to be quite humorous. There’s a sadistic enjoyment in watching a slithering lawyer work his magic on unsuspecting victims with feeble minds and weak morale. If one allows themselves to be manipulated at that caliber, then of course a lawyer will be able to do their job wonderfully. But then again, there are the lawyers that stand up for truth, justice, morals, ethics and all that jazz. Are these the people that one will hire to support them in a court room victory? Is this the lawyer that will go down into the trenches of the judicial system and combat your enemies? They probably are… but think about who is on the opposing end. Do you think they have the money to be spent on an unethical, undermining, bottom feeder that will do the pretty much anything to attain their 40%.