this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
98 points (100.0% liked)

main

15565 readers
14 users here now

THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)

(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)

A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!

Top Image of the Month will remain the Banner for a Month

Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!


gun-unity State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership

guaido Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources

smoker-on-the-balcony Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)

frothingfash Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with

just-a-theory An Amainzing Organizing Story

feminism Main Source for Feminism for Babies

data-revolutionary Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide


ussr-cry Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

And here's the chaser

Lady's and gentlemen....

We got him!

mission-accomplished-1mission-accomplished-2

mission-accomplished

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I know that it benefits the rich much more, but sometimes I feel that decent libel law can be OK (sorry this is vibes not analysis)

[–] [email protected] 37 points 8 months ago (4 children)

With one simple change to the legal system I think strong libel laws would be mostly a good thing. Same goes for a bunch of other laws that are usually bad in our current system actually.

No. Private. Lawyers. All lawyers should be paid by the government, assigned to projects as needed. No one gets to have an in house staff of lawyers. There are no more legal costs. This eliminates the ability for big companies to just bully you in legal limbo until you run out of money and your life is ruined, even if you win.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago

Damn you almost make believe lawyers can not suck…

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

This was a part of Lord Beveridge's plan for legal aid just after WWII in the UK, but it ultimately failed because the legal profession was very much opposed, and because the largest single target of lawsuits is the state itself, and requiring people seeking redress from the state to use state employees is a recipe for injustice.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

While lawyers should definitely be reformed, I’m not sure if this would be any different than what we have now. Governments can selectively assign high skilled or interest conflicted lawyers to certain cases (or the opposite for a losing outcome on purpose).

The parish system in Catholicism might be an interesting place to look at. Unless you have a specific skill (such as language, cultural), you’re basically reassigned to random churches every few years. And even if you do have those specific skills, you’ll be reassigned to random churches within those communities. This lottery system would also mean, in theory, that providing high quality and accessible legal education to aspiring lawyers would be in the interest of everyone because some millionaire’s lawyer will have a similar education to yours.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

While this would be an improvement for sure, rich people still have excess time and knowledge the poor don't which would allow them to pursue legal action.

The obvious solution is to waive all legal rights for anyone with a net worth >=$5M.