Fat? Two for one seat sale if you fly

[Oleg Bach]

I have a condition called lazyness and when I fly I need three seats I can stretch out on - It's medical condition and I need my beauty nap because getting ugly depresses me...so - off I go to court to argue on behalf of the who suffer the debilitating disease of lazyness - Or - I could just eat my face off for ten year and get one of those free motorized baby buggies with the light - and I could demand a parking spot next to my seat.

[blueblood]

Exactly. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Not to mention politics shouldn't play a part in the decisions. A judge shouldn't be worried that their completely legal decision will cost them their job just because some people don't know the law and aren't happy with the outcome.

Judges should however be accountable. They should be able to get fired like anybody else. So because a judge isn't elected it's impossible to be corrupt? Is everybody rich in that dreamland of yours? Do a shitty job and get canned like everyone else.

[Smallc]

Judges should however be accountable. They should be able to get fired like anybody else. So because a judge isn't elected it's impossible to be corrupt? Is everybody rich in that dreamland of yours? Do a shitty job and get canned like everyone else.

You think judges don't ever have to answer for things? You'd be wrong. I don't know the exact process here, but I'm pretty much certain there is one. They should be able to get fired....just not by a finicky electorate.

Judges make decisions based on interpretation of legislation. Just because we don't like a decision, its not necessarily wrong according to the law. A judge shouldn't get fired for following the law.

Edited November 22, 2008 by Smallc

[blueblood]

You think judges don't ever have to answer for things? You'd be wrong. I don't know the exact process here, but I'm pretty much certain there is one. They should be able to get fired....just not by a finicky electorate.

Judges make decisions based on interpretation of legislation. Just because we don't like a decision, its not necessarily wrong according to the law. A judge shouldn't get fired for following the law.

Judges answer to people higher on the food chain eg the supreme court. Worst case scenario is they are over ruled. No firing at all. Which is ridiculous, make outlandish rulings and get canned. The beauty of a democracy is being able to fire those in charge, the judiciary should not be an exception. Although that's for the politicians to do the firing.

Ah that's the thing, the electorate does have power, they elect politicians who pick judges and in a democracy the electorate is never wrong. Judges shouldn't be elected, but should also be able to be fired by the same people who hired them, which is politicians. And who do politicians answer to?

Having people who can't be fired results in corruption and abuse of power far beyond election shenanigans. Job performance is an issue as well, if the electorate is pressuring politicians to do something about the judiciary then heads should roll, thats how a democracy should work.

[Bryan]

A judge shouldn't be worried that their completely legal decision will cost them their job

Yes they should, at all times. They need to know that if they make lunatic decisions like this one, they will face the consequences.

[Smallc]

Yes they should, at all times. They need to know that if they make lunatic decisions like this one, they will face the consequences.

Again, its about the law, not about revenge, and not about what you want. We don't have mob rule here.

[Bryan]

Again, its about the law, not about revenge, and not about what you want. We don't have mob rule here.

Laws change, supposedly to reflect society. Judges making goofy decisions like this one are essentially creating new law. They need to be held accountable.

[Oleg Bach]

Laws change, supposedly to reflect society. Judges making goofy decisions like this one are essentially creating new law. They need to be held accountable.

As any lawyer if revenge is similar to justice - most will agree that it is. Judges can not be held accountable because they do not judge - they function only on policy handed them - They do not care what is right or wrong - They operate within a justice system where justice is outlawed. The ones that should be held accountable are the ones that appoint them. It makes sense that policy does not come down from the government - but from those that grant appointments - they must return the favour for the job - If the powerful group of old lawyers that appoint judges has an agenda - it is surely carried forth by the judges...have you had a look at most new judges - twits..and even the old ones still pull the private party line.

[Smallc]

Laws change, supposedly to reflect society. Judges making goofy decisions like this one are essentially creating new law. They need to be held accountable.

Why is it goofy? Because you don't agree with it?

[g_bambino]

Why is it goofy? Because you don't agree with it?

That would appear to be the case (mind the pun). I suppose he thinks the general electorate knows more about the law than the legal profession does.