What do law schools teach? Do they in fact teach the law and its philosophical purpose of origin; or do they instead teach future lawyers of this free country how to manipulate, circumvent, stretch, twist, and misapply the law for their own personal misguided gain or agenda?
By de Andrea
Law, since its origin, has never prevented any crime. This is because it is not the purpose of law to prevent crime, but instead it is the purpose of law to establish the conviction of one who has violated the law.
The only individual or collective accomplishment of substance that law has ever prevented is that of Liberty.
I myself have never attended law school, so I cannot with any authority testify as to what is actually being taught in a school of law. I believe that I can however, by my own evaluations of the corollaries and the effects of law, as well as a plethora of research into the origins, applications, and purposes of law, say that I have developed the ability to judge what is not taught in a school of law.
Anyone with an ability to analyze facts and draw reasonable conclusions, should be able to understand that law schools do not at the very least teach the history, origins, philosophy, and the purpose of law, especially what the application of law is in a free nation and a liberated society.
One only needs to observe the results of our legislatures, and the absence of laws that support liberty and freedom. Most of our legislators are lawyers or former lawyers, and, if for example they were actually taught the origins and purpose of law they would not be pumping out laws that are irrelevant to there own expressed purpose, (the prevention of crime), this is a misapplication of law.
Let us explore the purpose of law, or more importantly, what the purpose of law is not. One might assume that the purpose of law is to [prevent], when actually the purpose of law is to [cause], strength, support, protection and conviction. Law has never prevented anything but freedom. .
One might say that law is a deterrent to crime and thereby a preventative. No; to commit a crime is a choice, if one makes a choice to commit a crime, is it the failure of the law? No, it is the failure of the person that made the choice to commit the crime. If one chooses not to commit a crime because of the law, then it is still the choice that has prevented the crime, and not the law. The existence of bad or good choices will always result in the commission or the prevention of a crime; conversely the existence of law does not and has never prevented any crime, it simply gives one the choice.
Law is neither the prevention nor the cause of crime. The written law is the teacher, the documentation of inappropriate behavior; it identifies the wrong-doing and thereby convicts the perpetrator and upholds the establishment and rights of a free people.
Look at it this way if Law actually had the ability to prevent crime, America would be experiencing little or no crime, because the totality of all local ordinances, State, and Federal laws on the books in the U.S. nearly exceeds all the written laws in the rest of the world combined and yet we still have the existence of crime.
So what is the purpose of law then? As mention earlier, law is to strengthen, support, protect, and convict. So what needs strengthening, supporting, and protecting? The first answer would be Freedom, Liberty, and the Rights of the individual citizens. A law for example that would support and strengthen any one or all of our bill of rights would represent the purpose of law, conversely a law that would permit Government to plunder or restrict or infringe upon ones 1st or second amendment rights, or any of the rest of our inalienable rights or freedoms, would be a violation and an inappropriate application of law. The second answer would be the conviction of the law breaker or the violator of the law who subsequently denied one of ones rights, freedom, and liberty.
This overlooked philosophy is at the very foundation of Law in a free Nation. An interesting exercise would be to document all laws passed by our legislators in the past 100 years that strengthened, supported, and protected our rights as opposed to laws that restricted, damaged, or infringed upon our rights in the name of prevention of crime or some other misapplication of the purpose of law. I can guarantee that one would be hard pressed to find such laws that would appropriately identify the purpose of law.
I believe that one could, just by observing the results of what our law maker’s produce, deduce that this speaks volumes about what they as lawyers have not been taught. If one would examine just a few of the laws that have been passed by either the Federal or the State in the recent past one would find either a political or a misapplied crime prevention purpose, or both. Sometimes crime prevention is just used as an excuse for the new law, when the real purpose is to carry out an agenda of dependency, restriction or to gain some other political power by infringing upon ones rights, which is of course a perversion and an abuse of the legislative responsibility to make law.
THE BOTTOM LINE: In my opinion this philosophy and purpose of law, was best described by a nineteenth century French economist Frederic Bastiat, who not only was a member of the French legislative assembly but one who wrote many books, one of which was titled simply ”The Law”. It was published in France as an essay in 1850, in the last year of his life. In it he wrote the profound words “The only purpose of Law and Government is to guarantee the protection of individual Rights and Freedom of a liberated people”, this is a philosophy obviously not taught in American schools of law today.
Moreover, and more-importantly we may have surreptitiously and incrementally lost sight of this purpose altogether in our society. How long can a free people remain free when law becomes a surrogate for the personal responsibility of choice, as well as the circumvention of the guarantee to support, strengthen, and protect the individual rights and liberty of a free people? How long???
de Andréa
By de Andrea
Law, since its origin, has never prevented any crime. This is because it is not the purpose of law to prevent crime, but instead it is the purpose of law to establish the conviction of one who has violated the law.
The only individual or collective accomplishment of substance that law has ever prevented is that of Liberty.
I myself have never attended law school, so I cannot with any authority testify as to what is actually being taught in a school of law. I believe that I can however, by my own evaluations of the corollaries and the effects of law, as well as a plethora of research into the origins, applications, and purposes of law, say that I have developed the ability to judge what is not taught in a school of law.
Anyone with an ability to analyze facts and draw reasonable conclusions, should be able to understand that law schools do not at the very least teach the history, origins, philosophy, and the purpose of law, especially what the application of law is in a free nation and a liberated society.
One only needs to observe the results of our legislatures, and the absence of laws that support liberty and freedom. Most of our legislators are lawyers or former lawyers, and, if for example they were actually taught the origins and purpose of law they would not be pumping out laws that are irrelevant to there own expressed purpose, (the prevention of crime), this is a misapplication of law.
Let us explore the purpose of law, or more importantly, what the purpose of law is not. One might assume that the purpose of law is to [prevent], when actually the purpose of law is to [cause], strength, support, protection and conviction. Law has never prevented anything but freedom. .
One might say that law is a deterrent to crime and thereby a preventative. No; to commit a crime is a choice, if one makes a choice to commit a crime, is it the failure of the law? No, it is the failure of the person that made the choice to commit the crime. If one chooses not to commit a crime because of the law, then it is still the choice that has prevented the crime, and not the law. The existence of bad or good choices will always result in the commission or the prevention of a crime; conversely the existence of law does not and has never prevented any crime, it simply gives one the choice.
Law is neither the prevention nor the cause of crime. The written law is the teacher, the documentation of inappropriate behavior; it identifies the wrong-doing and thereby convicts the perpetrator and upholds the establishment and rights of a free people.
Look at it this way if Law actually had the ability to prevent crime, America would be experiencing little or no crime, because the totality of all local ordinances, State, and Federal laws on the books in the U.S. nearly exceeds all the written laws in the rest of the world combined and yet we still have the existence of crime.
So what is the purpose of law then? As mention earlier, law is to strengthen, support, protect, and convict. So what needs strengthening, supporting, and protecting? The first answer would be Freedom, Liberty, and the Rights of the individual citizens. A law for example that would support and strengthen any one or all of our bill of rights would represent the purpose of law, conversely a law that would permit Government to plunder or restrict or infringe upon ones 1st or second amendment rights, or any of the rest of our inalienable rights or freedoms, would be a violation and an inappropriate application of law. The second answer would be the conviction of the law breaker or the violator of the law who subsequently denied one of ones rights, freedom, and liberty.
This overlooked philosophy is at the very foundation of Law in a free Nation. An interesting exercise would be to document all laws passed by our legislators in the past 100 years that strengthened, supported, and protected our rights as opposed to laws that restricted, damaged, or infringed upon our rights in the name of prevention of crime or some other misapplication of the purpose of law. I can guarantee that one would be hard pressed to find such laws that would appropriately identify the purpose of law.
I believe that one could, just by observing the results of what our law maker’s produce, deduce that this speaks volumes about what they as lawyers have not been taught. If one would examine just a few of the laws that have been passed by either the Federal or the State in the recent past one would find either a political or a misapplied crime prevention purpose, or both. Sometimes crime prevention is just used as an excuse for the new law, when the real purpose is to carry out an agenda of dependency, restriction or to gain some other political power by infringing upon ones rights, which is of course a perversion and an abuse of the legislative responsibility to make law.
THE BOTTOM LINE: In my opinion this philosophy and purpose of law, was best described by a nineteenth century French economist Frederic Bastiat, who not only was a member of the French legislative assembly but one who wrote many books, one of which was titled simply ”The Law”. It was published in France as an essay in 1850, in the last year of his life. In it he wrote the profound words “The only purpose of Law and Government is to guarantee the protection of individual Rights and Freedom of a liberated people”, this is a philosophy obviously not taught in American schools of law today.
Moreover, and more-importantly we may have surreptitiously and incrementally lost sight of this purpose altogether in our society. How long can a free people remain free when law becomes a surrogate for the personal responsibility of choice, as well as the circumvention of the guarantee to support, strengthen, and protect the individual rights and liberty of a free people? How long???
de Andréa
de Andrea is an American Author
He has written Five books Titled:
Exposed-The truth about Islam-and Allah their god
The Second Amendment-It's the law
The Beginning of the NORTH AMERICAN UNION
THE UNITED STATES OF ISLAM
GLOBAL WARMING Truth or Hoax
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment