My favorites from a Craig's List post about bumper stickers

 

I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges

 

I Brake For No Apparent Reason

 

"How Fortunate for Leaders that Men do not Think." Adolph Hitler

Every so often I get an e-mail about some scheme to drive an oil company to its knees by boycotting a company, not buying gas on Tuesdays or some other nonsense.  As if you could take it to The Man by not buying gas on Tuesdays, if The Man was that lame, he would not be The Man.

An economist on NPR pointed out there there was only one thing consumers can do to make oil less expensive: use less of it.

The response to that advice from the American public: "No, seriously what can we do?"

In that way the American public has a lot in common with some of my clients.  Years ago a client of mine complained that every time he walked down the street the cops were always watching him, stopping him and asking questions and searching him.  He asked me what he could do about it.  I told him he should stop walking around in carrying  drugs and after a few times of catching him with nothing on him the cops would lose interest in him.  He gave me the "no, seriously ..." face.

Domestic clients use a different version of the same schtick.  There is a long litany of complaints about what a louse the partner is.  My ususal response is that if your partner is making you miserable you should leave.  Often then I hear, "Well but then he would get to stay in the house," or "I don't want to find somewhere else to live."  Just variations on the "no, seriously ..." attitude.

Most injuries in North Carolina are immediately preceded by the phrase "Hey y'all, watch this."  Apparently that holds true for Alabama.

From an e-mail:

 

 

 

The "why reward lawbreakers" argument is valid, but is only one part of the puzzle.  It is completely unrealistic to deport 11 million people.  The cost would be more than any rational country would be willing to pay. 

The phrase "We are a nation of laws" gets tossed out frequently in the immigration debate, but it is really just a bland platitude.  Those who use it imply that by tolerating widespread violation of the law, we are inviting anarchy.  What a load of crap.

 

First of all every nation is "a nation of laws."  That is what nations (or nation-states) are: political groups that claim sovereignty and use force to compel obedience to laws.  The fact that the U.S. has laws or enforces them to some degree, does not make us unique.

 

Second if widespread law-breaking (or ignoring) was a threat the empire would have sunk long ago.  If there are 12 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States, that is about 4% of the population or about 5% of the workforce. (more facts, Pew Hispanic Center).  So for the "nation of laws" crowd, somewhere around 4% of the people in the U.S. are violating the law and that is a crisis? Is it also a crisis that 37% percent of the population has tried marijuana? That is 37 million criminals.  22% of high school seniors have used pot in the last month.  Almost 8% of Americans have used illegal drugs in the last month.  We catch and punish only a tiny fraction at great cost and that has been going on my entire life.

 

In my state (N.C.) adultery and cohabitation has been a crime since 1805.  This law is violated with impunity and almost never enforced.  Crimes against nature (which include oral or anal sex) are still felonies here.  Even though the Lawrence case banned prosecution for consensual sex acts between adults, it remains on the books.  There are plenty of examples of laws banning sex toys, gambling or other things that are quite frequently ignored.  I'd like to see the reaction of the cops if I reported someone for placing a bet on the American Idol winner.

 

The truth is that when the law imposes an unrealistic and unpopular mandate on people it will be widely disobeyed or ignored and consistent enforcement will come at a huge cost, if it is possible at all.  We should shelve the phrase "we are a nation of laws" and discuss things that will work in the real, frequently law-breaking, world.

Any good article about prisons banning "Playboy" and "Penthouse" should always include the phrase "legitimate penological goals" with bonus points for working in "subject to the pleasure of their custodians."

Head shop owner learns that even when you win your case the state gets the last word.