Law v Common sense, uma descrição tocquevilleana do sistema legal americano, no Economist:
«The relentless piling of law upon law—the federal register has 70,000 ever-changing pages—does not make for a more just society. When even the most trivial daily interactions are subject to detailed rules, individual judgment is stifled. When rule-makers seek to eliminate small risks, perverse consequences proliferate. Bureaucrats rip up climbing frames for fear that children may fall off and break a leg. So children stay indoors and get fat.
The direct costs of lawsuits are only one of the drawbacks of an over-legalistic society. Too many rules squeeze the joy out of life. Doctors who inflict dozens of unnecessary tests on patients to fend off lawsuits take less pride in their work. And although the legal system is supposed to be neutral, the scales are tilted in favour of whoever is in the wrong. Because the process is so expensive and juries are so unpredictable, blameless people often settle baseless claims to make them go away. The law is supposed to protect individuals from the state, but it often allows selfish individuals to harness the state’s power to settle private scores.»
Tinha a ideia de que a lei também serve para nos proteger uns dos outros. Mas posso estar enganado…
Comentário por LPedroMachado — Janeiro 27, 2009 @ 18:34
Li o artigo. Interessante. Já sabia que são precisamente os juízes a abrirem processos estúpidos. É grave quando são precisamento os juízes as pessoas menos sensatas da sociedade.
Sobre a menina algemada. Só quem nunca deu aulas pode pensar que se pode fazê-lo sem contacto físico com os alunos.
Comentário por LPedroMachado — Janeiro 27, 2009 @ 18:53