4 ms·

I'd rather give my money to an insurance company than corrupt cops.

• throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  I'd pick a lawyer over either. At least he has to make a living delivering results. The other two have their existence perpetuated by law.
  • ksm1717 6y ago
    I mean you could argue that LAWyers literally exist because of law. Or at least perpetuated by the other two options which are perpetuated by law.
    • Yetanfou 6y ago
      Doesn't that work the other way around as well, as in LAWs come to life or stay in place because of LAWyers? Both due to the rather large percentage of lawyers who end up in politics as well as due to lawyers using their powers of persuasion - monetary or otherwise - to influence law makers?
  • kelnos 6y ago
    The prevalence and prestige of the law profession only started (in the US) in the late 1800s because of the rise of complicated, business-friendly contract law that made highly-trained lawyers a necessity for getting things done. The laws were used primarily to enforce burdensome contracts against workers and individuals, and protect businesses from holding up their end of the bargain. I'd say that period was likely the birth of the American tendency toward litigiousness. The legal profession exists and is so lucrative specifically because of the shape of government and the law.
• rurp 6y ago
  I've used a random traffic lawyer a couple times for stupid speed trap tickets. The process was really fast and they got the fine knocked down quite a bit. I'd much rather pay $100 each to a lawyer and the city, than pay the city $250. The only reason cities and towns abuse speed traps is that it's profitable. If the costs exceed the money they bring in they might shift those resources to real crimes and fix the artificially low speed limits.