This was in the NY Times, a propaganda organ of treason. Arquilla describes a Mombai style of simultaneous attacks by terrorists, the swarm. He proposes starting an infrastructure of small police posts, with a small number of people, with less training than elite forces.
How about this instead, growth of government promoter, left wing ideologue?
All citizens carry weapons.
All pro-criminal, lawyer, sick, traitor doctrines get repealed. There is a duty to kill criminals. There is immunity for the citizen killing the criminal. There are fines for failing to fire a weapon at a criminal.
The lawyer loves the terrorist and caused 9/11. The 9/11 Commission covered up the role of the lawyer in its cause. The lawyer prevents the total eradication of the enemies of the United States. The lawyer puts lawyer jobs above the safety of the public. The lawyer put a wall between the CIA and the FBI. All political correctness is case and promotes lawyer jobs. The taking of three airliners would have been less likely in another country. The American male has been lawyerized, and only certain death will unleash his heroism. The lawyer is embedded with our male warriors. This traitor has cancelled tactical decisions down to the squad level. One prevented the firing of a rocket from a drone at the limousive Mullad Omar. It goes on.
The point is that the lawyer rent seeking enterprise must be stopped if we are ever to be even a little safer.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Lawyer Gotcha to Free Hundreds of Vicious Thugs
Yet the perps, the judges, remain immune, based on Dennis v Sparks, cited in the article. Judges should not worry about litigation. Well the welder's work is far more important than that of the judge, a lazy, worthless, government hack. Shouldn't the welder get immunity. How can judges deal themselves immunity, when that is a legislative act? A welder sits of the bench, he gives all welders in the country legal immunity for any welding within the scope of welding duties. People would scream, conflict of interest.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Federal Prosecutors Held in Contempt for Discovery Beef
Always, seek sanctions for the adverse lawyers. No cult criminal thug should live a minute with certainty about his personal future. The defense attorney cannot be trusted to fulfill this aspiration. The defense attorney can replace the client in a minute if fired. If the adverse lawyer is taken out of action, the job of the defense attorney may be lost. It should become a standard of due professional care to parse every word and to find a rule broken by the other side's lawyer. Because of the infinity of rules, no case should go without attack on the adverse lawyer.
It should begin with e-discovery of the adverse lawyer's computers for improper motive. If the judge makes an adverse ruling, his computers should get a forensic examination for bias.
It should begin with e-discovery of the adverse lawyer's computers for improper motive. If the judge makes an adverse ruling, his computers should get a forensic examination for bias.
Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto of Tort Lawsuits
Sue these folks and their employers with $trillion in endowments.
Here .
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/tortsprof/files/tortbrochure1.pdf
There is a guideline maker duty to do no harm. These cult indoctrinators are generating self-dealing, anti-scientific, garbage guidelines. Any use by a judge represents insurrection against Article I Section 1 of the US Constitution and its state equivalents.
Hat Tip to Prof. Chris Robinette.
Here .
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/tortsprof/files/tortbrochure1.pdf
There is a guideline maker duty to do no harm. These cult indoctrinators are generating self-dealing, anti-scientific, garbage guidelines. Any use by a judge represents insurrection against Article I Section 1 of the US Constitution and its state equivalents.
Hat Tip to Prof. Chris Robinette.
Before Embezzling, File an EEOC or Human Resources Harassment Complaint. Supreme Court Calls Firing Retaliation
The employee never complained before the witch hunt. Once it began, she reported inappropriate behavior by a responsible officer. She was accused of embezzlement. The trial court found for the defendant that she sued for retaliation.
If I were an office embezzler, I would file multiple complaints with the EEOC, and with Human Resources department. I might make more money from the retaliation lawsuit than from the embezzlement.
There was no dissent. The vote shows that lawyer rent seeking, job generation trump all political ideology on the Supreme Court.
If I were an office embezzler, I would file multiple complaints with the EEOC, and with Human Resources department. I might make more money from the retaliation lawsuit than from the embezzlement.
There was no dissent. The vote shows that lawyer rent seeking, job generation trump all political ideology on the Supreme Court.
Potential Unintended Benefit of Economic Crisis
There is no remedy but to increase productivity to make more value, to generate taxes, and to pay off the debt. Chinese productivity is from the technology of 50 years ago, and will run out of ability to lend. Japan has a sclerotic Commie government that failed to end its economic downturn in the 1990's. Europe? Smart, educated people who will never give up their 6 weeks off at the spa, their 9 to 5, their 1.5 hour lunches. Lazy, Commie twits.
That leaves the US. What can be done to increase productivity?
1) Mercilessly crush the obstacles. The biggest obstacle are the Democrat, the lawyer, the Commie. These are synonyms. Pass laws excluding anyone who has passed 1L from all benches, all legislative seats, all policy positions in the Executive. Laws exclude the convicted felon, who is far less damaging than the lawyer.
2) The rate of R & D should be 20% of the GDP, not 2%. That is the fraction for high tech industries. Become a high tech economy, especially in life sciences. Once recognized, a slow increase in that fraction can be pushed.
3) Corporal punishment returns to school, and lawyer entitled parents are crushed, as are lazy, incompetent, anti-learning teachers unions. End all higher budgets for special ed. Put the money into productive students. High tuition for disabled kids is from garbage science, has no merit, and is a total waste. Force education on everyone. Brook no resistance to school discipline. The idea of uneducated, full time Roman Orgy lifestyle kids, parasites, enabled by the vile lawyer traitor on the bench, is over. If kids fail to improve standardized scores for two years, have the principal be fired, as a regulation. Any principal caught cheating goes to prison.
Benefit from the bailouts, by enacting controls on the lawyer profession, or just keep going downhill. Live as they do in South America or Europe, like pigs.
That leaves the US. What can be done to increase productivity?
1) Mercilessly crush the obstacles. The biggest obstacle are the Democrat, the lawyer, the Commie. These are synonyms. Pass laws excluding anyone who has passed 1L from all benches, all legislative seats, all policy positions in the Executive. Laws exclude the convicted felon, who is far less damaging than the lawyer.
2) The rate of R & D should be 20% of the GDP, not 2%. That is the fraction for high tech industries. Become a high tech economy, especially in life sciences. Once recognized, a slow increase in that fraction can be pushed.
3) Corporal punishment returns to school, and lawyer entitled parents are crushed, as are lazy, incompetent, anti-learning teachers unions. End all higher budgets for special ed. Put the money into productive students. High tuition for disabled kids is from garbage science, has no merit, and is a total waste. Force education on everyone. Brook no resistance to school discipline. The idea of uneducated, full time Roman Orgy lifestyle kids, parasites, enabled by the vile lawyer traitor on the bench, is over. If kids fail to improve standardized scores for two years, have the principal be fired, as a regulation. Any principal caught cheating goes to prison.
Benefit from the bailouts, by enacting controls on the lawyer profession, or just keep going downhill. Live as they do in South America or Europe, like pigs.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Law in Utter Failure: Torts as a Lawyer Bunco Operation
The purposes of torts include deterrence of bad conduct, increasing the safety of products by making dangerousness more expensive, decreasing the need for rigid, obsolete regulation, compensation of injured people, and to prevent violent retaliation by injured parties or their families. Instead, failure is its only fruit.
1) All money comes from the general public.
2) All safety improvements have come from technology development. None has ever come from a torts action.
3) The standard of prudent behavior is set by a fictional character. No juror is allowed to consider the ideals or behavior of a real person. The reason for this reliance is to make prudence an objective standard. Instead, this ridiculous doctrine of using fictional characters as arbiters is to impose the subjective bias of the judge in the case on the defendant.
4) At the core of negligence is duty. Duty is determined by the foreseeability of harm. There is foreseeability. The sun has risen in the East and set in the West millions of times without exception. The foreseeability of an accident is rarer, more like a that of a winning lottery ticket, true even in the most dangerous situations. The burden of proof in a civil trial is the preponderance of the evidence. That means the evidence makes it a minimum of 51% likely that the plaintiff is right. That is a natural landmark for foreseeability. However, defendants lose cases in which the rate of injury is in the foreseeability range of lottery winning numbers. These verdicts violate the procedural due process of the civil defendant. Worse, across cases, the foreseeabilities have very wide ranges, as do the damages for equivalent injuries.
5) Torts remains mired in Medieval misconceptions, and espouses the chain of causation. That chain may be interrupted by an unforeseen, unintended factor. That breaks the chain of legal causation and ends the case. Modern catastrophe analysis focuses on the clustering of factors. There may be 12 in a catastrophe, all coming together in an instant. If one of them is prevented or fails to take place, the entire catastrophe may not take place at all. So all defendants are being scapegoated for catastrophes that took place after 12 other factors, parties, and happenstances clustered randomly sometimes. This scapegoating violates the procedural due process rights of civil defendants to a fair hearing.
6) Most of the cost of torts is consumed by providers. Victims see little money. Even if the verdict is large, it may be for future care, and the medical profession consumes it.
7) There is no price for permanent, devastating injuries. No one would trade such an injury for any amount of money. Most people would be willing to spend an infinite amount of other people's money to avoid one for themselves. There is no market for injuries to price one. The verdict is payment for something that does not exist. It is like selling stock in a company that does not exist. Such sellers would go to prison, as a rule. The range of payment is wide for equivalent or for the same injury. This wide range violates the procedural due process rights of the civil defendant.
1) All money comes from the general public.
2) All safety improvements have come from technology development. None has ever come from a torts action.
3) The standard of prudent behavior is set by a fictional character. No juror is allowed to consider the ideals or behavior of a real person. The reason for this reliance is to make prudence an objective standard. Instead, this ridiculous doctrine of using fictional characters as arbiters is to impose the subjective bias of the judge in the case on the defendant.
4) At the core of negligence is duty. Duty is determined by the foreseeability of harm. There is foreseeability. The sun has risen in the East and set in the West millions of times without exception. The foreseeability of an accident is rarer, more like a that of a winning lottery ticket, true even in the most dangerous situations. The burden of proof in a civil trial is the preponderance of the evidence. That means the evidence makes it a minimum of 51% likely that the plaintiff is right. That is a natural landmark for foreseeability. However, defendants lose cases in which the rate of injury is in the foreseeability range of lottery winning numbers. These verdicts violate the procedural due process of the civil defendant. Worse, across cases, the foreseeabilities have very wide ranges, as do the damages for equivalent injuries.
5) Torts remains mired in Medieval misconceptions, and espouses the chain of causation. That chain may be interrupted by an unforeseen, unintended factor. That breaks the chain of legal causation and ends the case. Modern catastrophe analysis focuses on the clustering of factors. There may be 12 in a catastrophe, all coming together in an instant. If one of them is prevented or fails to take place, the entire catastrophe may not take place at all. So all defendants are being scapegoated for catastrophes that took place after 12 other factors, parties, and happenstances clustered randomly sometimes. This scapegoating violates the procedural due process rights of civil defendants to a fair hearing.
6) Most of the cost of torts is consumed by providers. Victims see little money. Even if the verdict is large, it may be for future care, and the medical profession consumes it.
7) There is no price for permanent, devastating injuries. No one would trade such an injury for any amount of money. Most people would be willing to spend an infinite amount of other people's money to avoid one for themselves. There is no market for injuries to price one. The verdict is payment for something that does not exist. It is like selling stock in a company that does not exist. Such sellers would go to prison, as a rule. The range of payment is wide for equivalent or for the same injury. This wide range violates the procedural due process rights of the civil defendant.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Law in Utter Failure: False Convictions from Incompetence
The report.
http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=23959
The website for the study.
http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=21310
Although the field of the law is called evidence, its meaning is not the same as the ordinary meaning. The core of scientific evidence is repeatability. Repeatability of outcomes across cases also defines justice. So the law and science have superficial similarity in values. However, the power and immunities of the law have allowed it to remain mired in Medieval notions of evidence. The rules of evidence should be rewritten to exclude any anti-scientific unvalidated evidence. The limits of memory should be acknowledge. Lawyer gotcha games should be excluded. And physical evidence should be required in any case involving subjective reports.
Until the Rules of Evidence can be written by scientific people, and not by rent seeking, Scholasticism indoctrinated lawyers in failure, the report represents a checklist of rebuttal of incompetent evidence gathering.
Not only is the lawyer allowing massive criminal victimization, especially of minority populations, but he is convicting innocent people.
All prosecutor, all judge, and all expert immunities should be ended by statute. The victims of the lawyer and of his client, the criminal should be able to get compensated for injuries from their carelessness.
http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=23959
The website for the study.
http://www.nysba.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=21310
Although the field of the law is called evidence, its meaning is not the same as the ordinary meaning. The core of scientific evidence is repeatability. Repeatability of outcomes across cases also defines justice. So the law and science have superficial similarity in values. However, the power and immunities of the law have allowed it to remain mired in Medieval notions of evidence. The rules of evidence should be rewritten to exclude any anti-scientific unvalidated evidence. The limits of memory should be acknowledge. Lawyer gotcha games should be excluded. And physical evidence should be required in any case involving subjective reports.
Until the Rules of Evidence can be written by scientific people, and not by rent seeking, Scholasticism indoctrinated lawyers in failure, the report represents a checklist of rebuttal of incompetent evidence gathering.
Not only is the lawyer allowing massive criminal victimization, especially of minority populations, but he is convicting innocent people.
All prosecutor, all judge, and all expert immunities should be ended by statute. The victims of the lawyer and of his client, the criminal should be able to get compensated for injuries from their carelessness.
Friday, January 30, 2009
New Book on 1L's Under Stress
I have not read the book of Prof. McClurg. I would be shocked if he told the truth about 1L. The lawyer profession is organized as a criminal cult enterprise. Its central tenets are supernatural and derived from Medieval church Scholasticist concepts. These are ridiculous to the modern ear.
So indoctrination is the only way to force modern students to accept this Medieval garbage. Not only is this anti-scientific garbage, all the central doctrines violate the Establishment Clause by their origin from a church. The IRAC is from Peter Abelard and Alexander of Hales, monks of the High Middle Ages. Worst, they were French.
So, a culture of terror is set up, with intimidation of students by humiliation. It makes them too afraid for their futures to question the content.
Next, the content is gibberish in massive quantity. To do well or to even pass the student must study gibberish about 80 hours a week. This workload serves to isolate students from normal people, and outside activities. The risk is that too much outside contact may serve to bring the content into question.
Other criminal cult elements include confession, self-criticism, a hierarchical structure, draconian discipline not for lawyers injuring the public, but for lawyers posing the slightest challenge to the lawyer hierarchy, reordering the thinking and the language of already very intelligent people, alienating them from others.
This article discusses the Watchtower people, but apply to law school. See what can be easily recognized.
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/beel.htm
I invite 1L to run down this summary chart of the criteria defining various forms of mind control. The column most congruent with law school, I think, is indoctrination.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/cults_in_our_midst/cults_in_our_midst2.html
Rough indoctrination methods best explains the stress of 1L. However, this indoctrination is so good, no one knows it has even taken place. After passing 1L, intelligent, modern students come to believe minds may be read, the future of rare accidents forecast, the standards of conduct of a fictional character, that 12 strangers off the street, excluding anyone with any knowledge, can detect the truth by their gut feelings. Lastly, the real meaning of the word, reasonable, has been covered up. It means, in accordance with the New Testament. It stands apart from logic, intellect, that were misled by the Fall from the Garden of Eden, and by deadly sins.
So indoctrination is the only way to force modern students to accept this Medieval garbage. Not only is this anti-scientific garbage, all the central doctrines violate the Establishment Clause by their origin from a church. The IRAC is from Peter Abelard and Alexander of Hales, monks of the High Middle Ages. Worst, they were French.
So, a culture of terror is set up, with intimidation of students by humiliation. It makes them too afraid for their futures to question the content.
Next, the content is gibberish in massive quantity. To do well or to even pass the student must study gibberish about 80 hours a week. This workload serves to isolate students from normal people, and outside activities. The risk is that too much outside contact may serve to bring the content into question.
Other criminal cult elements include confession, self-criticism, a hierarchical structure, draconian discipline not for lawyers injuring the public, but for lawyers posing the slightest challenge to the lawyer hierarchy, reordering the thinking and the language of already very intelligent people, alienating them from others.
This article discusses the Watchtower people, but apply to law school. See what can be easily recognized.
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/beel.htm
I invite 1L to run down this summary chart of the criteria defining various forms of mind control. The column most congruent with law school, I think, is indoctrination.
http://www.rickross.com/reference/cults_in_our_midst/cults_in_our_midst2.html
Rough indoctrination methods best explains the stress of 1L. However, this indoctrination is so good, no one knows it has even taken place. After passing 1L, intelligent, modern students come to believe minds may be read, the future of rare accidents forecast, the standards of conduct of a fictional character, that 12 strangers off the street, excluding anyone with any knowledge, can detect the truth by their gut feelings. Lastly, the real meaning of the word, reasonable, has been covered up. It means, in accordance with the New Testament. It stands apart from logic, intellect, that were misled by the Fall from the Garden of Eden, and by deadly sins.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Opposing Experts Preclude Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Violate the Right to a Fair Hearing
If opposing experts testify in good faith, then a scientific controversy exists. It cannot get resolved by rhetoric, and jury preference. It may only be resolved by additional scientific evidence from validated research. So only cases that are within the knowledge of the jury, or have expert support for only one side are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the court. Any case allowing a debate between opposing experts violates the procedural due process right of the civil defendant to a fair hearing.
If a criminal case depends on expert testimony, and has an opposing expert, it is impossible to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof. If both experts are testifying in good faith, and the standard is to be have 80% plus certainty, the jury has no way to judge the testimonies, except by the likability of the expert. Such an effect violates defendant's due process right to a fair trial.
If a criminal case depends on expert testimony, and has an opposing expert, it is impossible to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof. If both experts are testifying in good faith, and the standard is to be have 80% plus certainty, the jury has no way to judge the testimonies, except by the likability of the expert. Such an effect violates defendant's due process right to a fair trial.
Friday, January 9, 2009
Indicia of Unlawful Church Origin of Common Law
And, thus a violation of the Establishment Clause.
1) Latin phrases (e.g. mens rea, actus reus, bone fide, causa mortis, certiori, corpus delecti, de facto, de jure, de minimus, de novo, dicta, en banc, ex parte, ex relatione, forum non conveniens, habeus corpus, in camera, in forma pauperis, infra, in loco parentis, in pari delecto, in pari materia, in personam, in rem, inter vivos, ipso facto, jus, lex loci, malum in se, malum prohibitum, mandamus, modus operandi, nexus, nisi prius, per curiam, per se, per stirpes, primae facie, pro se, pro tanto, quantum meruit, quasi, quid pro quo, res gestae, res ipsa loquitur, res judicata, respondit superior, stare decisis, ultra vires).
2) Judge's high bench. This is St. Dominic Presiding at an Auto a Fe, from a 1490 painting by Pedro Berruguette. Aside from the high bench, one notes the 7 "justices, and one chief justice," to confer the appearance of consensus and accepted virtue on the hateful decisions.
3) Court building and courtroom architecture resembling a church.
4) Gavel.
5) Judges' robes.
6) Stentorian, pretentious, self-important tones of the judge, to scare the peasants. Most judges are has been politicians who lost an election or lawyers failed in private practice. Most are buffoons.
7) Rising of assembly upon entrance of judge.
8) Oaths.
9) Supernatural core doctrines, including, mind reading (intent), future forecasting (foreseeability), truth detection by the use of gut feelings (of juries), dependence on a fictional character for standard of conduct (allowing judge self-interest and judge bias to set conduct for all). The biggest violation is any use of the word, reasonable, which means, in accordance with the New Testament.
10) Inquisition like business plan. The Inquisition did go after heretics, Jews, Moslems. Most had assets that were seized and given to the Church. There was an intense conflict of interest in the Inquisition and in lawyer torts.
11) Parsing documents word for word.
12) The formats of the Bar exam and of legal briefs.
13) Sovereign legal immunity which can only be logically justified by the King's speaking with the Word of God, otherwise is impossible. For example, the Prussian Emperor could be sued by his plumber for not paying a bill. The Imperial Attorney would appear to defend the case. Sovereign immunity was invented by the French monks that administered England.
14) The legal analysis of crime. The content of the analysis of crime came from the catechism. In this Wikipedia description of mortal sin in the Catholic Church, one can see great similarities to criminal law analysis. There are "elements." The harm is grave. There is no ignorance of the law in the conscience. There is intent. There are mitigating circumstances, such as insanity.
15) The adversarial system of arriving at a verdict. Disputation was a method of Scholasticism to arrive at a reliable conclusion. The lawyer of the 13th Century picked up that method for their needs.
1) Latin phrases (e.g. mens rea, actus reus, bone fide, causa mortis, certiori, corpus delecti, de facto, de jure, de minimus, de novo, dicta, en banc, ex parte, ex relatione, forum non conveniens, habeus corpus, in camera, in forma pauperis, infra, in loco parentis, in pari delecto, in pari materia, in personam, in rem, inter vivos, ipso facto, jus, lex loci, malum in se, malum prohibitum, mandamus, modus operandi, nexus, nisi prius, per curiam, per se, per stirpes, primae facie, pro se, pro tanto, quantum meruit, quasi, quid pro quo, res gestae, res ipsa loquitur, res judicata, respondit superior, stare decisis, ultra vires).
2) Judge's high bench. This is St. Dominic Presiding at an Auto a Fe, from a 1490 painting by Pedro Berruguette. Aside from the high bench, one notes the 7 "justices, and one chief justice," to confer the appearance of consensus and accepted virtue on the hateful decisions.
3) Court building and courtroom architecture resembling a church.
4) Gavel.
5) Judges' robes.
6) Stentorian, pretentious, self-important tones of the judge, to scare the peasants. Most judges are has been politicians who lost an election or lawyers failed in private practice. Most are buffoons.
7) Rising of assembly upon entrance of judge.
8) Oaths.
9) Supernatural core doctrines, including, mind reading (intent), future forecasting (foreseeability), truth detection by the use of gut feelings (of juries), dependence on a fictional character for standard of conduct (allowing judge self-interest and judge bias to set conduct for all). The biggest violation is any use of the word, reasonable, which means, in accordance with the New Testament.
10) Inquisition like business plan. The Inquisition did go after heretics, Jews, Moslems. Most had assets that were seized and given to the Church. There was an intense conflict of interest in the Inquisition and in lawyer torts.
11) Parsing documents word for word.
12) The formats of the Bar exam and of legal briefs.
13) Sovereign legal immunity which can only be logically justified by the King's speaking with the Word of God, otherwise is impossible. For example, the Prussian Emperor could be sued by his plumber for not paying a bill. The Imperial Attorney would appear to defend the case. Sovereign immunity was invented by the French monks that administered England.
14) The legal analysis of crime. The content of the analysis of crime came from the catechism. In this Wikipedia description of mortal sin in the Catholic Church, one can see great similarities to criminal law analysis. There are "elements." The harm is grave. There is no ignorance of the law in the conscience. There is intent. There are mitigating circumstances, such as insanity.
15) The adversarial system of arriving at a verdict. Disputation was a method of Scholasticism to arrive at a reliable conclusion. The lawyer of the 13th Century picked up that method for their needs.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Good Samaritan Can be Sued, Despite Law
And here.
The standard tort law is that an Olympic swimmer may stare at a three year old girl drowning in a pool at his feet, and do nothing. He has no duty to rescue the little girl. He may not be sued after her death. (The innocent homeowner, and pool maker are to be sued, because they have money.) This is sick lawyer, disgusting outrage. It gets worse. If the Olympic swimmer sets out to do the right thing, leans in to pull out the girl out of the pool, he instantaneously sets off a duty to not do any damage. So, her dress tears as he pulls her out of the pool. He is liable for the value of the torn dress. He must pay. The rescuer that saved the life of a little girl must pay under the sick lawyer law.
It comes as no surprise then that Americans, as a rule, are better off doing nothing to help others, just watch them die.
What explains this insanity? The hierarchy of the criminal cult enterprise that is the lawyer profession wants no one but agents of central government helping others. Rescue by others decreases government employment.
Here are the consequences. It is inconceivable the 9/11 hijacking could have succeeded on a foreign airline. The Americans on the first two flights were lawyerized, and feminized by the lawyer. Only the threat of certain death prompted the brave passengers on the third flight to act. It is bad luck that hard working people died in the Twin Towers, and that the passengers saved lawyer dominated and run Congress from destruction.
At the V Tech massacre, only immigrants acted to save others. One held the door closed, and was shot and killed through it. Once the execution style shooting starts, does it not make sense to do something, anything. Throw a chair, a book, run around. Don't just stand there. No. The students were lawyerized and feminized. The female immigrant was less lawyerized and feminized than American jocks.
The judges on this court must be removed. Statutes should pass assessing substantial fines on anyone failing to attempt to rescue, however, negligently and incompetently.
I am surprised a lawyer has not sued the rescuers on the third flight of 9/11. Lawyers filing such claims should be beaten and driven out of town. Anyone not rescuing us from these lawyers should be assessed heavy fines. The judges must also be driven out of office, or impeached. They should go on trial for their decision, and nor for any collateral corruption lawyer gotcha. Their decision is the crime.
The standard tort law is that an Olympic swimmer may stare at a three year old girl drowning in a pool at his feet, and do nothing. He has no duty to rescue the little girl. He may not be sued after her death. (The innocent homeowner, and pool maker are to be sued, because they have money.) This is sick lawyer, disgusting outrage. It gets worse. If the Olympic swimmer sets out to do the right thing, leans in to pull out the girl out of the pool, he instantaneously sets off a duty to not do any damage. So, her dress tears as he pulls her out of the pool. He is liable for the value of the torn dress. He must pay. The rescuer that saved the life of a little girl must pay under the sick lawyer law.
It comes as no surprise then that Americans, as a rule, are better off doing nothing to help others, just watch them die.
What explains this insanity? The hierarchy of the criminal cult enterprise that is the lawyer profession wants no one but agents of central government helping others. Rescue by others decreases government employment.
Here are the consequences. It is inconceivable the 9/11 hijacking could have succeeded on a foreign airline. The Americans on the first two flights were lawyerized, and feminized by the lawyer. Only the threat of certain death prompted the brave passengers on the third flight to act. It is bad luck that hard working people died in the Twin Towers, and that the passengers saved lawyer dominated and run Congress from destruction.
At the V Tech massacre, only immigrants acted to save others. One held the door closed, and was shot and killed through it. Once the execution style shooting starts, does it not make sense to do something, anything. Throw a chair, a book, run around. Don't just stand there. No. The students were lawyerized and feminized. The female immigrant was less lawyerized and feminized than American jocks.
The judges on this court must be removed. Statutes should pass assessing substantial fines on anyone failing to attempt to rescue, however, negligently and incompetently.
I am surprised a lawyer has not sued the rescuers on the third flight of 9/11. Lawyers filing such claims should be beaten and driven out of town. Anyone not rescuing us from these lawyers should be assessed heavy fines. The judges must also be driven out of office, or impeached. They should go on trial for their decision, and nor for any collateral corruption lawyer gotcha. Their decision is the crime.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Review of Data on Medical Malpractice in Texas
That there is no blood money (money from the doctor's assets for huge awards), is confirmed. Damage caps have a beneficial if small effect.
Tort reform has always been a mildly effective remedy to the damage of medical malpractice business.
Problems not addressed:
1) The majority of medmal cases are weak or frivolous. Over 75% fail at every stage of litigation. The profit stems from the small number that generate an insurance award. The filing of a weak case may be ethical. However, it is lawyer malpractice.
2) All awards and all costs come from the public. Insurance covers these, but all insurance premiums come from doctor fees to the public. So these costs increase fees or decrease access. An example of a decrease in access is the growing rarity of family doctors and of maternity wards.
3) Medical malpractice prevents improvements in quality and reduction of medical errors. They force a cover up on health care providers. All advice to the contrary, such as the apology movement, serves the discovery aims of the medmal plaintiff bar. Because most cases are weak, the barest minimum of cooperation is justified intellectually and morally. Furthermore, total e-discovery should be demanded against the adversaries of clinical care, the plaintiff, the plaintiff lawyer, and the judge after any adverse ruling.
4) The doctrines of torts, especially the idea of a chain of causation, does not apply to modern remedies or deterrence. Mishaps are better understood as clusters of factors coinciding for a horrible outcome.
5) Medical malpractive may cost around 2% of the health care budget. However, its intimidation effect causes a 10% of wasted services in defensive medicine. Doctors are also afraid to fail to go all out for moribund, terminal patients out of fear of medmal claims or even criminal prosecutions by the lawyer district attorney. They torment dying patients with futile care. Futile care may account for 25% of the health care budget being wasted. So, ending medmal may reduce costs, not by 2% but by 37%, with no decrease in the quality of care.
6) A friend moved to another state. Years later, he tried to cancel his medical license in the former state. They refused, and delayed for months, after he insisted on deactivating it. That means that statistics that doctors have not moved away are false if based on licensing board numbers. They do not want to embarrass their political bosses, and just ignore cancellations.
What are better remedies?
1) End the privity obstacle to lawyer malpractice claims by adverse third parties. When a lawyer files a weak claim, the doctor has been damaged by lawyer carelessness and malpractice, and should be made whole. The litigation privilege is self-dealt by lawyers and judges, is unjust and violates the constitutions of the US and of many states.
2) If a patient suffers an injury by doctor error, they should receive Medicaid. Why should the tax payer be liable for the error of a doctor? The taxpayer is liable under today's medmal practice anyway, in the form of higher fees or decreased access to care. The Medicaid benefit for those damaged by medical error would be cheap, would provide care for the injury, and would cut out the massive rent seeking, worthless services of the lawyer, the court, and the insurance businesses. Because most of medmal awards are consumed by the costs of weak cases, fees, insurance profits, the cost of Medicaid benefits would be low. So, it could be easier, faster to get without conflict or time wasting for all parties.
3) In exchange for Medicaid benefits to all involved, regulators could demand total quality improvement. Every serious medical error deserves an airline crash style analysis of the multiple factors that clustered to cause it. Entire wings of hospitals could be closed by regulators until the causes were addressed. As a patient, that would be the greatest benefit. The results of the investigation should be posted to the web so that similar operations could benefit before they would hurt a patient.
Tort reform has always been a mildly effective remedy to the damage of medical malpractice business.
Problems not addressed:
1) The majority of medmal cases are weak or frivolous. Over 75% fail at every stage of litigation. The profit stems from the small number that generate an insurance award. The filing of a weak case may be ethical. However, it is lawyer malpractice.
2) All awards and all costs come from the public. Insurance covers these, but all insurance premiums come from doctor fees to the public. So these costs increase fees or decrease access. An example of a decrease in access is the growing rarity of family doctors and of maternity wards.
3) Medical malpractice prevents improvements in quality and reduction of medical errors. They force a cover up on health care providers. All advice to the contrary, such as the apology movement, serves the discovery aims of the medmal plaintiff bar. Because most cases are weak, the barest minimum of cooperation is justified intellectually and morally. Furthermore, total e-discovery should be demanded against the adversaries of clinical care, the plaintiff, the plaintiff lawyer, and the judge after any adverse ruling.
4) The doctrines of torts, especially the idea of a chain of causation, does not apply to modern remedies or deterrence. Mishaps are better understood as clusters of factors coinciding for a horrible outcome.
5) Medical malpractive may cost around 2% of the health care budget. However, its intimidation effect causes a 10% of wasted services in defensive medicine. Doctors are also afraid to fail to go all out for moribund, terminal patients out of fear of medmal claims or even criminal prosecutions by the lawyer district attorney. They torment dying patients with futile care. Futile care may account for 25% of the health care budget being wasted. So, ending medmal may reduce costs, not by 2% but by 37%, with no decrease in the quality of care.
6) A friend moved to another state. Years later, he tried to cancel his medical license in the former state. They refused, and delayed for months, after he insisted on deactivating it. That means that statistics that doctors have not moved away are false if based on licensing board numbers. They do not want to embarrass their political bosses, and just ignore cancellations.
What are better remedies?
1) End the privity obstacle to lawyer malpractice claims by adverse third parties. When a lawyer files a weak claim, the doctor has been damaged by lawyer carelessness and malpractice, and should be made whole. The litigation privilege is self-dealt by lawyers and judges, is unjust and violates the constitutions of the US and of many states.
2) If a patient suffers an injury by doctor error, they should receive Medicaid. Why should the tax payer be liable for the error of a doctor? The taxpayer is liable under today's medmal practice anyway, in the form of higher fees or decreased access to care. The Medicaid benefit for those damaged by medical error would be cheap, would provide care for the injury, and would cut out the massive rent seeking, worthless services of the lawyer, the court, and the insurance businesses. Because most of medmal awards are consumed by the costs of weak cases, fees, insurance profits, the cost of Medicaid benefits would be low. So, it could be easier, faster to get without conflict or time wasting for all parties.
3) In exchange for Medicaid benefits to all involved, regulators could demand total quality improvement. Every serious medical error deserves an airline crash style analysis of the multiple factors that clustered to cause it. Entire wings of hospitals could be closed by regulators until the causes were addressed. As a patient, that would be the greatest benefit. The results of the investigation should be posted to the web so that similar operations could benefit before they would hurt a patient.
Friday, November 28, 2008
The Civil Recourse Theory of Torts
If torts has validity as civil recourse, why are lawyers and judges allowed to maintain their self-dealt immunities? Why are victims of lawsuit abuse excluded from this liberal political order? For them, the recourse never happens. The overwhelming majority of cases are weak, fail. Yet lawsuit lottery playing persists. The filing of a weak case is lawyer malpractice, and torts should make its victim whole. The allowance of a weak case to get past first pleading is judge malpractice, and torts should make its victim whole.
Until these lawyer and judge self-dealt immunities are reversed, all claims of torts benefits represent lawyer bad faith.
Until these lawyer and judge self-dealt immunities are reversed, all claims of torts benefits represent lawyer bad faith.
So the Supremacy Voted for Obama, But to Get the Opposite of What He Promised
We last left you with the Supremacy partying with extreme left wing wackos and Hate America traitors, swarming from Harvard Law School to persuade people to vote for Obama.
In accordance with the Immutable Law of Hilarious Political Irony, the Supremacy had voted for George Bush. In his 2000 debate Bush promised, there will be no nation building under my administration. We got an orgy of nation building. We also got a doubling of the size of the Federal Register of Federal regulations. His Supreme Court declared carbon dioxide a pollutant. That means all being using aerobic respiration now emit a pollutant whenever they exhale and are subject to regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency. The deficit exploded to $trillion. The size of government exploded. The share of taxes paid by the rich, meaning most productive, that exploded. His Supreme Court also knocked criminal sentencing guidelines. These had decrease reliably the crime victimization rate by 40%. Now we have the Scalia Bounce in violent crime. The murder rate is suppressed solely by advances in trauma care, derived from the Iraq war. The number of violent crime victims saved by these advances will exceed the number of combat deaths by many orders of magnitude. And then, my personal favorite, I got an East German style banking system from Bush, where the government owns them, and tells them to whom to lend.
So does the Law apply to Obama. So far it does. I will be listing its effects as time passes.
1) We are the UNITED States of America, he said, promising to end partisan politics. So his first appointment is of Rambo Emmanuel, a vicious, lunatic partisan, cursing every fourth word, a ballet dancer who sends dead fish to people he finds offensive.
2) We will exit Iraq immediately. So he appoints the administrator of the Surge as Secretary of Defense. He appoints Hillary Clinton, the person who voted to fund the war, and criticized Obama's irresponsible plan to cut and run. We are going to be in Iraq for hundreds of years.
In accordance with the Immutable Law of Hilarious Political Irony, the Supremacy had voted for George Bush. In his 2000 debate Bush promised, there will be no nation building under my administration. We got an orgy of nation building. We also got a doubling of the size of the Federal Register of Federal regulations. His Supreme Court declared carbon dioxide a pollutant. That means all being using aerobic respiration now emit a pollutant whenever they exhale and are subject to regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency. The deficit exploded to $trillion. The size of government exploded. The share of taxes paid by the rich, meaning most productive, that exploded. His Supreme Court also knocked criminal sentencing guidelines. These had decrease reliably the crime victimization rate by 40%. Now we have the Scalia Bounce in violent crime. The murder rate is suppressed solely by advances in trauma care, derived from the Iraq war. The number of violent crime victims saved by these advances will exceed the number of combat deaths by many orders of magnitude. And then, my personal favorite, I got an East German style banking system from Bush, where the government owns them, and tells them to whom to lend.
So does the Law apply to Obama. So far it does. I will be listing its effects as time passes.
1) We are the UNITED States of America, he said, promising to end partisan politics. So his first appointment is of Rambo Emmanuel, a vicious, lunatic partisan, cursing every fourth word, a ballet dancer who sends dead fish to people he finds offensive.
2) We will exit Iraq immediately. So he appoints the administrator of the Surge as Secretary of Defense. He appoints Hillary Clinton, the person who voted to fund the war, and criticized Obama's irresponsible plan to cut and run. We are going to be in Iraq for hundreds of years.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Why Can't the Navy of a Nation Just Eradicate the Entire Somali Pirate Population? Lawyers.
The money the pirates make likely funds the Islamic insurgency. If it takes over the government, Somalia will be a safe haven for Al Qaeda. That justifies the eradication of this terrorist threat.
Before that can be done, any lawyers preventing early intervention should be arrested, tried for treason, and executed. The arrest list should include all judges, legislators, and lawyer advocacy group leaders. There should be no immunity for people who will enable the destruction of the nation. This piercing of legal immunities should be based on policy considerations.
This article addresses confusion. It fails to explain, only the terrorist lover lawyer is confused, and no one else that cares about the survival of our nation. And another article.
Before that can be done, any lawyers preventing early intervention should be arrested, tried for treason, and executed. The arrest list should include all judges, legislators, and lawyer advocacy group leaders. There should be no immunity for people who will enable the destruction of the nation. This piercing of legal immunities should be based on policy considerations.
This article addresses confusion. It fails to explain, only the terrorist lover lawyer is confused, and no one else that cares about the survival of our nation. And another article.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Legalize All Adult Pleasures to Boost the Economy
That is all. Just add $2 trillions of wealth to pay for the bailout and to grow out trouble.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Do the Same to Government, Deduct Tax Payment for Government Never Events
Good idea. But remedies should be mutual to be fair. Some government never events for which taxes should be deducted:
1) exploding space shuttles;
2) not plowing a snow covered main street;
3) lawyer interference causing an overwhelming military to get bogged down, generating massive costs;
4) impeachment of a president over lawyer gotcha of misuse of words in a deposition;
5) forcing banks to lend mortgages in neighborhoods with irresponsible lifestyles;
6) failing to pilot test major laws that have unanticipated, reverse consequences;
7) not keeping campaign promises and doing the opposite once elected
1) exploding space shuttles;
2) not plowing a snow covered main street;
3) lawyer interference causing an overwhelming military to get bogged down, generating massive costs;
4) impeachment of a president over lawyer gotcha of misuse of words in a deposition;
5) forcing banks to lend mortgages in neighborhoods with irresponsible lifestyles;
6) failing to pilot test major laws that have unanticipated, reverse consequences;
7) not keeping campaign promises and doing the opposite once elected
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
