English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

why both ?

2006-10-24 16:10:37 · 2 answers · asked by Sam 1 in Politics & Government Government

2 answers

Well, "a_poor_misguided_soul" is basically correct, but I hope his comment is tongue-in-cheek.

Of COURSE we can't have a law in the book that covers every nuance of every situation that might happen. If we did, and if the facts of cases were never in dispute, we could just enter the facts into a computer and get a court decision (no need for judge, jury, or even the lawyers).

In reality, the details of the case have to be presented, along with opinions about which law(s) should apply, and what prior cases have been decided that might provide some guidance in the current case. Of course a prior case may have been decided incorrectly, or society may have evolved since then so that a different outcome is now called for.

The law is a very complex world, and it significantly affects people's lives, so we should search for any relevant prior information that could help reach a proper decision.

2006-10-24 16:45:55 · answer #1 · answered by actuator 5 · 0 0

Because sometimes things come up that the idiots in the legislature hadn't thought of.

2006-10-24 23:13:42 · answer #2 · answered by a_poor_misguided_soul 5 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers