As I've first read Murphy's law and some other humorous "laws", there was an impression of the author making an insight and then formulating it in a minimalisti

As I've first read Murphy's law and some other humorous "laws", there was an impression of the author making an insight and then formulating it in a minimalistic way typical for the real scientific laws, which is what makes the laws interesting and funny on two levels at once: there's an "a-ha" moment and the "similarity" to the "real" laws. As I've seen enough cartoons, for me this list appears just to be a clumsy description of some gags. It fails on the appearance of insight and it fails on the appearance of the real-law minimalism. That's why it's not funny. YMMV, I see there are people who like it.