Comment: It is the only thing that makes sense

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I dont know everything (see in situ)

It is the only thing that makes sense

I have been going through the complications of law. I have thoroughly studied case law and Jurisprudence. I don't claim to know everything but one thing that has become clear to me when studying the law and jurisprudence in depth is that the more one reads the more consistencies and inconsistencies one finds. Law has an essence in Common sense and the more common sense one gleans from research the better off they are. In order for the protections of law to be maintained and effective it seems common sense that the maximum number of people who understand its Common sense foundations is key.

Case law does get very complicated when it comes to contracts and commerce for good reasons but when it comes to common interactions amongst people and crime this is the most basic form of applicable law there is. You may have a very complicated picture but I believe that this position is not necessarily an advantage in realizing tangible and consistent protections of law. If one does not have a good grounding in common sense then the Law becomes words on a page that form one's reality and consent to laws that may or may not have applicability.

I have found through very deep study that very simple common sense thought experiment logic puzzles can show conflicts in Law without the need for such extraneous and unneeded complications and build a good foundation for being able to quickly identify conflicts no matter how complicated the details get.

Will you play a logic game in Law? I only seek simple replies to simple questions. If you feel that something is too complicated to succinctly answer then please just say its too complicated. I do not wish to take too much of your time here. I just want to see if we can have quick and simple back and forth on this to search for conflicts in logic of law.

Questions for your understanding of law:
In a modern day criminal case, who is the accuser liable for the accusations?

Is it your understanding in law that in any civil or criminal action one has the right to face their accuser(s)?

Are unconstitutional codes null and void from the time of their enactment and therefor color of law?

Oh by the way, can we drop the negativity and superiority complex here? It seems to be getting in the way of simpler, more efficient and effective dialogue that could be fruitful for both of us. And no Dave, violence is not the only choice. In fact my whole intent is to find the real protections of law in all of its forms for the explicit purpose of never experiencing any form of violence again. This is my pursuit of happiness.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...