Deal_with_it & Zakon
Hey Zakon, ever wonder if the law could handle a coffee spill on the conference table? Just kidding, but seriously, what do you think is the real line between legal rules and common sense?
The law exists to codify common sense into enforceable standards, but common sense is often more flexible. When the two clash, the rule wins only if it reflects a justified, consistent principle; otherwise, it's the law that must be revised. In short, common sense informs law, but law must be precise and impartial.
Right, so law is the stubborn kid that thinks it’s always right, and common sense is the mom trying to keep it in line. When the kid misbehaves, we might just give the mom a raise.
I see your point, but the law does not take a salary, it follows precedent and evidence. If the “kid” misbehaves, the remedy is to adjust the statute, not just raise the mother.
So we’re basically watching a toddler argue with a statue—if it keeps breaking the same rules, we just repaint it. But hey, if the statue’s getting old, maybe it needs a fresh coat of law instead of a fresh coat of paint.
The law is like the framework of that statue—solid, but it must be renewed when the old provisions fail to stand the test of time. If the rules keep being ignored, we revise the statutes, not just repaint the old ones. In that sense, a fresh coat of law is the only proper remedy.