Page 1 of 1
Now the collars make sense
Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 12:53 pm
by Squeaky Bunny
It first appeared as though the two visitors were of the clergy. Now we see that they are in the legal profession.
Both fields have something in common . . .
They both pray on people.
Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:10 pm
by Bigdude
Great quotes:
Tagon: Don't just stand there! Fire our attorney! NOW!
[Schlock plasguns both attorney-drones]
Tagon: I said "fire", not "fire AT". I never used the word AT.
Schlock: How do you feel about the word "vaporise"?
or:
Massey: ...it's full of stars!
Attorney Drone: Oops! Wrong switch!
Massey: Ahhhh! It's full of LAWYERS!!!
or:
Schlock: Cool! I just took out three walls and an evil attorney-drone!
Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:20 pm
by BlasTech
Try dialling the intensity back to three
Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:56 pm
by TMLutas
BlasTech wrote:Try dialling the intensity back to three
That is dialed back. He didn't even start mentioning the time that Schlock ate an attorney.
http://www.schlockmercenary.com
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:35 am
by Doink
Now, now, this is all well and good, but just remember who'll save your fannies should you ever appear in court.
Speaking of which, does anyone have a possible plan for getting rid of lawyers?
Cheneys got a gun
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 9:47 am
by Squirrelly61104
Doink:
Speaking of which, does anyone have a possible plan for getting rid of lawyers?
Well, Cheney seems to be working on it.
(sorry, I know that jokes getting old fast. on the other hand, since his friend is recovering, I think it qualifies as honest ribbing)
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 10:18 am
by TMLutas
Doink wrote:Now, now, this is all well and good, but just remember who'll save your fannies should you ever appear in court.
Speaking of which, does anyone have a possible plan for getting rid of lawyers?
There's an easy one. Reduce the complexity of the law so that you don't need to use them as much and make it riskier to file suit when you don't really have a case by having the loser pay for the winner's legal fees.
Posted: Wed Apr 19, 2006 11:15 am
by Shyal_malkes
I don't know how we'd be able to reduce legal complexity without either stepping on people's rights or introducing anarchy. it's just a complex system that needs people (lawyers) to understand it.
personally if you were to take away private attourneys that might be something, that way your legal representation didn't revolve around the ammount of money you had. just a thought though.
Rufio wrote:the only adults here are pirates, we kill pirats
Peter wrote:well, I'm not a pirate. I'm a lawyer.
Rufio wrote:...KILL THE LAWYER!!!
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 2:14 am
by Atarlost
So you'd rather your legal representation revolve around some bored beurocrat who wants a bribe or he'll assign you some nobody who's fresh out of law school with a barely passing grade?
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:57 am
by Shyal_malkes
personally I'd rather it be that way (and then if something fishy does start going on the 'beurocrat' can be tracked down and shot) then have it so that the rich go free and no justice occurs.
but I'd rather a computer were assigned to make a random judgement. I mean, all we'd need then is security to make sure nobody tampers with it. and if the system persisted there'd be less personal demand to be a lawyer so most would stink at their jobs anyway which would make it unimportant who you got.