> Those "scummy" lawyers are performing an important function, and if not for them things probably wouldn't be anywhere near as accessible for disabled people a

> Those "scummy" lawyers are performing an important function, and if not for them things probably wouldn't be anywhere near as accessible for disabled people as they are now. I've read court transcripts of attorneys who march into court wanting to measure the incline of a ramp with a 3 inch ruler (because a 6 inch ruler doesn't prove what they're after). Furthermore, they also want to measure a part of the ramp right under the railing where a handicapped person isn't even able to walk, because that's the only place they could find a violation. This is the type of behavior you get from some of these folks. The way the ADA is written encourages this type of behavior (which doesn't serve anyone but the attorney), because the laws are written so very poorly. > It's kind of ironic that the libertarian-types who are often the loudest ones condemning stuff like this are also the first to defend people similarly motivated by greed as performing important functions, such as price gougers and the like. There is no irony. There is a world of difference in acknowledging that someone has the right to do something as opposed to deciding whether that act is morale. For example, just because someone (e.g. the attorney) has the right to do something (e.g. practice law), I can also at the same time think their behavior (e.g. in the courtroom) is unethical. Furthermore like someone might sell a very poorly made product, they're allowed to do such things, but one could also still find that behavior terribly unethical. With these sorts of attorneys, any small good they may incidentally create, is drowned out by the splash damage they create. The pursuit of you and your family's interests is a moral ideal, that can be corrupted by people who do so without ethics nor regard for the damage they create.