As IF Times

link The Associated Press: Obama pledges changes to avert future spills.

Future students of history and civilization will study this last half century period in America and will no doubt be fascinated by the various official responses to national calamities.  In addition to the linked story above is the news that the present Attorney General, Eric Holder is making a personal appearance in the Gulf region presumably to ascertain what legal actions can be taken in the wake of this big oil leak.  The administration has also let it be known that a commission will be organized to investigate what to do and to make more laws.  This makes sense to whom?  A massive engineering problem arises requiring experts from all kinds of technical disciplines to try to resolve and the government sends in…. lawyers???

As if every ailment that affects society has a legal solution. Western society has been conditioned to think that somehow, legal resolutions are the ultimate cure all.  The first instinct for most when some misfortune befalls them is to call a lawyer and why not? This seems to be the civilized way to act in a decent society.  Except that what will ultimately happen is people will tire of the inanity of this mindset and will revolt.  As the current raging rancor over Arizona’s immigration laws demonstrate, people will flout laws anyway if no one is going to enforce them.  Why go to the trouble of engaging shiploads of lawyers to create laws if no one bothers to enforce them?  Is this not just a massive make-work program for lawyers?

The tragically flawed delusion inflicted upon society that somehow lawyers and laws are the salvation of all has reached comical proportions.  Massive oil leak? Send in lawyers. Gas pedal sticking in your Toyota? Call in the lawyers.  A business like Microsoft too succesful? You guessed it, get lawyers involved. As I mentioned in a previous post, just wait for the lawsuits from college graduates who can’t find jobs after spending a small fortune in tuition. 

In direct contradiction to a society that supposedly nurtures self determination and initiative, byzantine and nuisance laws actually discourage human development and impedes the progress of people.  Just today, there is the news story of a woman who is suing Google for giving her map directions which placed her in the middle of a highway where she was injured by traffic, see here: http://www.nydailynews.com/tech_guide/2010/05/31/2010-05-31_lauren_rosenberg_sues_google_blames_faulty_google_maps_directions_after_being_hi.html  Not surprisingly, this woman is from California where the altered state is the preferred state.

This state of delusion has formed a society in which finger pointing is the default response for all events affecting our individual lives.  The gulf oil leak as covered by the media is focused upon legal heads arguing over who’s at fault for the catastrophe.  Apparently the blame reaches all the way to the first Bush administration.  In line with legal tactics, everyone involved with the leak can expect to be found somewhat culpable for the fiasco.  British Petroleum certainly, but what of all the suppliers to the rig site?  What of the providers of steel, of the manufacturers of the drilling machinery?  What of the State or Federal bodies that granted permits for the drilling?  What about the financial institutions that financed the project?  What about the people who provided food to the workers on the rig?  Will they be roped in as well since they ‘enabled’ the drilling to take place?

It appears that we’re well past the point where reams of laws and more importantly, the mentality of the legal system  can be seen to be protecting the people.  We are now well into the stage where the legal requirements governing people’s everyday lives behave more like sand in the gears than the lubricant they should be.  Years ago, a book by a former Jurist, Catherine Crier wrote a book entitled The Case Against Lawyers, which described the many ways in which the law profession was undermining society by creating an unfair legal system.  Onerous laws and regulations are in large part responsible for migration of many core industries to other emerging nations.   Businesses would recoil at the thought of having the Mafia extort protection money from them as a cost of doing business.  Onerous laws and regulations are exactly the same thing, except….who protects us from the lawyers?

The worst part of what has happened is that entire generations of bright minds have been sucked into the lure of the law racket because it  continues to be a lucrative profession regardless of economic cycles.  The consequence is that bright minds have been diverted from doing things that can actually benefit society, in areas of medical research and engineering for example.  As long as people can succeed in life by pointing fingers for a living, that’s unlikely to change.

link Pushy fliers may show up on TSA’s radar – USATODAY.com.

Much ink has been spilt on the “egregious” new law in Arizona attempting to suppress the chaos and violence associated with the out of control illegal immigration problem in that state.  Impassioned pleas from opponents of the new measure insist that the new law is draconian and and nothing less than a full assault on human rights and promotes racism.  Politicians at the highest level are denouncing the new law even though it essentially mirrors a federal law already on the books.  Even actors and comedians, known of course for their broad intellectual grasp of major issues, are weighing in with their opposition to the new law.  If an intellectual heavyweight such as George Lopez thinks the law is unjust, well maybe we’d better rethink the whole immigration policy.

What a waste of time.  There are far greater numbers of troublemakers attempting to get on planes than trying to sneak across borders.  Why waste time, effort, money and possibly life on enforcing such unpopular things such as immigration law.  The efforts are much better expended on airport harassment.  The cost benefit analysis skews the results considerably towards airport security as a means of spotting criminal behaviour.  Rather than having to pay trained police officers armed with deadly weapons, we need only pay for minimum wage workers to screen for troublemakers.  Instead of facing potentially armed drug criminals, the TSA people need only face the unarmed young and elderly.  Naturally, with all the vocal groups protesting human rights violations, they would have to exclude Muslims, Blacks and Hispanics from special screening.

If you are part of a constituency that has never had a history of causing grief to the nation, well you’re in for special scrutiny.  The elderly, the very young, Whites, Asians, business people, all will be easier targets of intimidation because there is no fear of these groups protesting their mistreatment.

As it stands now in the U.S., police officers feel reluctant to ask for legitimate identification for fear of stirring racism and profiling concerns.  At airport security, there is no such reluctance.  Heck, citizens can even be asked to strip to a certain degree and be felt up like a package of Charmin tissue.   Any protests will instantly plop their names onto an official troublemaker list and voila, a permanent criminal suspect is created.  As time goes on, this list can only grow as the definition of pushy travellers gets fuzzier and fuzzier.  Statistics will soar on the TSA troublemaker database and will be justification to demand more money into their coffers to combat the rising incidences of disturbing airport behaviour.  Which of course, will lead to even more invasive and surly TSA procedures. It will be entirely logical to transfer the weapons from Border agents to arm the TSA staff.

Illegal entry across U.S. borders will cease to be an enforceable pursuit and movement there will be free and easy.  Just as long as they don’t attempt to fly in.