The Long Claw Of The Law, Mocked

This week, the school has been putting on a production of Les Miserables. Though I don't like to toot my own horn, I'm in the Pit Orchestra, playing the clarinet, and literally tooting my horn. Well, actually, it's the school's horn, so I don't really have a problem there. However, as I sit there listening to the same show about five hundred pi hundreths, I have a lot of time to reflect on my life. Well, actually, I lied there too, cause I don't reflect on my life, I just reflect on ways to make fun of other people's lives. But this is besides the point. At one point (and this is the point), Javert, who, for the Les Mis Illiterate, is the psycho cop obsessed with capturing Jean val Jean and wastes 20 years of his life chasing the guy, only to commit suicide (oops, just spoiled the ending). That wasn't actually a sentence, but I thought that since it was such a long appositive (though it was not a positive appositive) I'll restart that sentence. At one point, Javert sings that he "is the law, and the law is not mocked." I'll admit it, it sounded like a personal challenge, or some sort of bet. So basically, I'm not sure what I'm going to do, but I really just have to prove that I am the best (like I have to even try to prove that!). But first, for those of you who were wondering, yes, Les Mis does have the obligatory part where the two love birds sing a cheesy duet on opposite sides of the stage. That basically is a law, and I just mocked it.

Where to begin? Well, first, I would like to state that this will not be an analysis of stupid laws. There are already too many books about that, based on the laws of small towns with populations that could probably be counted on your fingers. And if they're really big, with your toes too. These books are also based on the fact that none of the laws they write about are enforced. The reason I refuse to write like these books is because I will have more than enough to make fun of if I simply look at the law as a whole. And also because individual laws would require actual research and analysis, which would probably be against my professional (that's a joke!) ethics. And would also require me to stay up past my bedtime writing this. (Mr. Rich, I realize that this says that I wrote this on Sunday at 1:43 PM like all the rest of my blogs, but it was actually written the Friday before, at about ten. I simply like to cheat against myself.)

Almost every society has a code of laws. Why is this? This is because people love rules. Rules are basically the favorite activity of the people making them. Your parents make rules, your teachers make rules, your religious leaders make rules, and so does anyone else that has power over you. I am just being facetious. Actually, for Mr. Rich's sake, I was being facetious in saying that I was being facetious. Anyways, laws are actually to set guidelines for proper conduct in society. They keep the metaphorical machine of society well greased with the metaphorical engine oil of not doing things you want to do. Imagine if there weren't laws against public nudity. It would be like the old men in the locker room everywhere! Imagine if it was alright to kill someone else. Imagine if it were alright for you to stick a knife in the annoying kid who sits next to you in English. That would, although violence is highly popular in our society, be, to put it poetically, bad. So, laws are there to keep people in line. If everyone follows the laws, everyone would be just great, and there would be no need to sue anyone. Which would probably be against some sort of Constitutional Ammendment prohibiting lawyers not having jobs. Cause whenever you have the law, people always love to add a "y-e-r" to it to create, you guessed it, unless you are unable to spell, lawyers.

The second aspect of law is its creation. This generally occurs because of some sort of legislative body. Why do we have legislative bodies? Isn't the constitution of the country enough? Don't these questions really create a facade of analytical thought? Well, to answer these questions, the legislative bodies are there to help small minority interest groups (though they deny it) and also so there can be corrupt lobbyists. No, actually, contrary to common belief, legislative groups have a purpose. That purpose is to create laws to keep up with modern trends that founders of countries could never have forseen. These legislative groups can be highly productive. Given my Taiwanese patriotism, I would have to say that the Taiwanese Parliament is the greatest of these groups. On the account that, while the British may get to call each other mean names, the Taiwanese can actually participate in violence. Can't you imagine just how productive it would be if members of Congress would hit each other? That would be great! Instead of wasting tax payer money on "conventions" in nice places (Disneyland, the Carribean, and other places really conducive to legislative work in the form of good food and entertainment), they would waste it on medical treatment! And, for the sake of throwing a curveball, I'm going to write a four paragraph essay (well, I already have) to make Mr. Rich happy that it wasn't a five paragraph one, which shows some creativity in the form of wanting to go to bed. Cause I think I've mocked the law enough. Javert, you owe me five bucks.