Quote:
Originally Posted by BBQMan
With the United States having over 50% of the world’s attorneys the chances of escaping from them is essentially zero if you have any net worth. As for being parasites, that is the economic definition. As I said, lawyers facilitate the transfer of wealth; they create nothing that adds to the GDP.
Most PI attorneys solicite clients – not the other way around. The term ‘ambulance chaser’ came into being because it is an accurate description of many in the PI business. How many ads on television, the backs of phone books, etc that encourage people to sue with phrases such as “no cost to you if we do not collect” do we need to see before we accept the fact that it lawyers, not plaintiffs, who initiate most lawsuits? The last time I checked, no homes were being built in the western world filled with asbestos, Thalidomide had been pulled from the market, Agent Orange is no longer being used, etc. Countries around the world did this because they learned of the dangers and then promptly acted. The difference is that in the United States, these cases were a source of profit for the bar at the expense of the rest of the people. You missed the point where I said we need to reduce the numbers of lawyers, not eliminate the profession.
In your discussion of viewpoints, you failed to add the most important viewpoint in a lawyer’s mind – ‘What’s in it for me?’ As I pointed out in several major class action lawsuits, the truth was never sought it was even deliberately avoided - the only thing sought was personal gain at the expense of many.
Lawyers do not advocate the clients in many cases – they advocate their own gain. As for not just being an accomplice to fraud – a huge number of PI attorneys initiate the fraud. See everything I have cited. I applaud you for withdrawing from casers because your client insisted on presenting a lie. Would that all attorneys would do so, but far too many do not.
Freedoms are lost when our government and our courts erode the power of the people. While our revolutionary leaders included lawyers, businessmen and military leaders led the fight. The first lawyer to become President was John Adams. He was also the first President to seek to withdraw freedoms through The Alien and Sedition Acts. The actual protection of our freedom lies with the military. They can act and not just talk.
Consider the outcome of the cases of Ana Alvarez-Jacinto and compare it to Weiss. She was, quite correctly, sentenced to 30 years in prison for committing a fraud amounting to 11 million dollars. Weiss, on the other hand, was sentenced to 30 months for defrauding others of billions. His partner, William Lerach, pled guilty and further said this systemic dishonesty is an ‘industry practice’. He was speaking not only about the firm, Milberg Weiss, but the entire industry of shareholder lawsuits and the attorneys engaged in them. Once again I ask, if the ABA sees nothing wrong with the ad, “Birth defect, you will collect – no one needs to be at fault. ” then how can you assert the honesty of PI attorneys? And what does that say about the bar in general?
|
As I said before, in every profession there contains that miniscule - yes, miniscule - percent which cause 90% of the grief the rest of the profession is labeled with.
Whether one case deserved a greater sentence than the other, that's one of the reasons appeals court exist. With some, people are out of money - with others, people die.
In my perfect world, each high school kid would get a full year's worth of law and civics, so they would understand what law means, how their system of government is supposed to operate, the difference between types of crimes, what are the parts of a contract (and the associated responsibilities), and what their civil rights are. If that existed, there would be fewer "dumb laws," fewer criminals and fewer lawsuits due to either (or neither) party fulfilling contractual duties. The level of ignorance regarding law and government (state and federal) is exploited routinely by many in elected and appointed positions, and the reason they get away with that <15% approval rating yet keep getting re-elected is tied to that public ignorance.
The actual protection of our freedom is the reaction of the entire citizenery, and not just the military. Where the military is dominant, coujps are routine and oppression occurs. The Founding Fathers were wise beyond their years in keeping the military as subordinate to civilian authority.
The
you failed to add the most important viewpoint in a lawyer’s mind – ‘What’s in it for me?’ remark is so far off base it's tough to give a simple response. If that were true, many of my colleagues, and me included, would never have taken on the cases they have. When you add in all the prosecutors, the civil rights advocates, the public defenders, the judges (most of whom could make a lot more in private practice), those who work at the legal aid societies everywhere, those with the various church groups, the Veterans Pro Bono Consortium, etc., whether full-time or part-time, that's a far different picture than the "ambulance chaser" image.
I must say that I don't agree with the breadth and scope of legal advertising, since most of it is aimed at a population of questionable legal understanding, but then again, I'm not much for all the drug company advertisements, the print ads hawking which type of knee surgery is best, and all the "have all the sex you want with no responsibility" either. I have joked with the PI attorneys I know, saying that I'm surprised they don't advertise on the ceilings of ambulances, so people have something to read while in the stretcher. Yeah, freedom of speech does have its not-so-stellar moments.
Fewer lawyers? The other way around would be better. The more who really know the law (preferably, everyone), the more who may live by it.
.