Lawyers need to go

[Losty]

KitKat I love you even though you’re a nutball

[SaStrike]

You want reasons:

Judge Jean Boyd
Judge Aaron Persky
Judge Kurt Eisgruber
Judge Jeneaine Howard

You're giving judges WAY too much power, not to mention police too much power. Imagine being questioned without an attorney present. You've basically made a way for 99% of people to be charged with a crime--guilty or not--to be prosecuted.

Removing lawyers (who are powerless in the first place) would give judges and police way too much power? How so? What kind of power do police even have beyond arresting? And what can a lawyer do against a corrupt judge? Take the case/judge to a higher judge? Judges already have all the power. It's basically up to their integrity how cases are decided.

Now don't get me wrong I'm not in favour of removing lawyers as this will cause a lot of damage for ignorant people who don't know or understand the law; what they can and can't do in certain situations etc.

It could have good side effects though, like the general citizens actually learning about the law instead of being lazy and just getting a lawyer when they need one. It could also have bad side effects like no one knowing the law because of laziness and ignorance etc. Then people would just get arrested, do/say something stupid and illegal, then found guilty.

[Little lunch]

Could we at least give those slimy fuckers a lot less pay and a standard rate so that the rich can't buy better justice?

[Chad32]

Who is gonna run the defense and prosecution if there are no lawyers?

The people, themselves.
The lawyers just spread their lies.

I don't think most people would be able to do it. I know lawyers get a bad rap and all, but the solution is fixing the system, instead of throwing the system out.

[KevinM1]

Could we at least give those slimy fuckers a lot less pay and a standard rate so that the rich can't buy better justice?

The amount of money your average lawyer gets isn’t anything like what mainstream media portrays it to be.  My oldest brother is a damn good lawyer, and a non-equity partner at the firm he’s currently at, and he’s definitely not rolling in money.  The amount of money a lawyer charges != the amount of money they take home.  Most of it goes to a combination of the firm itself (read: senior partners), building expenses (rent, maintenance), insurance, and taxes.  All while the lawyer routinely works more than 8 hours a day, and often on weekends.  Especially for cases that actually go to court.

My brother automatically gives 50% of what he charges to the firm, as specified in his contract.  Out of the remaining 50% that he actually sees, he only takes home around 30%-35% of it.

---

The people, themselves.
The lawyers just spread their lies.

I don't think most people would be able to do it. I know lawyers get a bad rap and all, but the solution is fixing the system, instead of throwing the system out.

Laypeople definitely wouldn’t be able to do it. A law degree is an advanced degree. Successfully navigating the law and ensuring one’s rights aren’t violated requires, so say nothing of understanding court procedure, requires that amount of education.

And lawyers don’t spread lies. They work on the behalf of their clients. All lawyers are held to an ethical standard - their license depends on it. No lawyer ever wants to go before the bar and attempt to explain themselves.

EDIT: my brother is on NH’s ethics committee

[Joods]

Everyone deserves a fair hearing... without lawyers the legal system would be unfair and corrupt (or even more so than normal anyways).

---

Here's a good reason: Learn about Law.

Judges know more than lawyers. Wouldn't the system be better suited without the two lawyers arguing?

It is not the judge's job to educate litigants in the courtroom. It is their job to hear both sides of a lawsuit and to take into consideration all evidence presented before them.

Lawyers are necessary to give a voice to those who cannot speak for themselves or who do not have the skills necessary to be a pro se litigant. What about having a skilled, licensed individual, practicing law in order to represent people is so wrong?

Really, I think the only people who are opposed to lawyers are the ones who seem jaded by the legal system for some reason.

[Edwardo Piet]

No... without disagreement it's impossible to ever get objectivity and fairness.

I disagree.

How is objectivity and fairness obtained from atheist arguing with theists?

Terrible analogy.

We're not talking about atheists arguing with theists. Theists can't be reasoned with about their theism very often because their childish theistic beliefs are childish.

If you want a better example: try philosophy or science. If everyone in philosophy or science just agreed with each other we'd have never made it out of the dark ages.

[Joods]

You want reasons:

Judge Jean Boyd
Judge Aaron Persky
Judge Kurt Eisgruber
Judge Jeneaine Howard

You're giving judges WAY too much power, not to mention police too much power. Imagine being questioned without an attorney present. You've basically made a way for 99% of people to be charged with a crime--guilty or not--to be prosecuted.

Names are not reasons.

Weak argument. You totally ignored the rest of his response.

---

No... without disagreement it's impossible to ever get objectivity and fairness.

I disagree.

How is objectivity and fairness obtained from atheist arguing with theists?

How is that even relevant? No one is being put on trial in these forums for having discussions with one another. Again, weak argument.

[Edwardo Piet]

Did you fucking gloss over the rest of my post, or did you simply choose not to read it?

You should have provided something of better importance.

She did.

I'm sometimes surprised you're an atheist. You're a highly illogical person.

---

Well, I hope next time you're questioned by police you don't ask for an attorney.  And when they coax a confession out of you, and put you in jail, I'll laugh my fucking ass off.

Dudette, the police are far off my radar.  Makes me think the are on yours for some reason, though.

Irrelevant. The point is if it did happen you'd be fucked and suddenly want a lawyer.

Try understanding hypotheticals for once!

---

You must live in some make believe world where the police don't suspect people, or frame people.  Must be nice living in make believe land.

He sure does: See what I mean about how I am sometimes surprised he's not a theist?

[Joods]

You seem to have full faith in the police and judges.

I mean after all you want to get rid of lawyers, thus giving ALL the power to police and judges.  Police can question you however they like.  They can lock you in a room, leave you there, and coerce a confession.  Makes their job really easy.  They'd have a 100% conviction rate.  

You really want to give all this power to judges and police?  I know I don't.

What I place truth in is something opposite of faith.

What I want to give power to is one precisely like a judge who is not biased.

Lawyers are biased.

If you don't think judges are biased, I have some ocean front property in Arizona I'd like to sell to you.