EOC Week 10: Lawyer Jokes

Q: What's the difference between a female lawyer and a pitbull?

A: Lipstick.

(http://www.iciclesoftware.com/LawJokes/IcicleLawJokes.html)

When a person assists a criminal in breaking the law before the criminal gets arrested, we call him an accomplice. When a person assists a criminal in breaking the law after the criminal gets arrested, we call him a defense lawyer.

(http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html)

Question: Do you know how to save five drowning lawyers?
Answer: No.
Reply: Good!

(http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html)

Question: How many lawyers does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Answer: How many can you afford?

(http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html)

The National Institutes of Health have announced that they will no longer be using rats for medical experimentation. In their place, they will use attorneys. They have given three reasons for this decision:
1. There are now more attorneys than there are rats.
2. The medical researchers don't become as emotionally attached to the attorneys as they did to the rats.
3. No matter how hard you try, there are some things that rats won't do.

(http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html)

Good News: A busload of lawyers ran off a cliff. The bus was destroyed and there were no survivors. Bad News: There were three empty seats.

(http://www.stromer.com/jokes/185jokes.html)

EOC Week 9: Wall Street Editorial

Marijuana and its use has been for many years a controversial topic, not only in the United States but around the world. Most recently two states have approve the use of marijuana for adult recreational purposes in small amount. Only problem with this is that is not up to a state to decide whether to legalize marijuana or not since the criminalization of marijuana is a federal crime, though President Obama has decided to do nothing about this. “The Justice Department all but ordered U.S. attorneys nationwide not to enforce federal marijuana laws. The memo was a long-delayed response to voter referenda last November in Colorado and Washington states that legalized adult recreational use of marijuana, not merely in the usual fake "medical" context… Obama could lead that debate, or at least offer his view, but he knows that the politics of drug legalization is still tricky and there could be a backlash in states with hot Senate races next year.” (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323324904579044771286022400.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet). I believe that the president is not enforcing the use of marijuana he is just simply completely ignoring it, which is not necessarily a good idea. “While this process of withdrawing and re-acceding would be controversial, it would set a precedent for the global prohibitory state of marijuana. Instead of being known for our high drug-related incarceration rate, we could be known for transforming the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs into a convention that prioritizes harm reduction over criminalization.” (http://www.policymic.com/articles/61953/to-make-marijuana-legalization-a-reality-this-should-be-obama-s-next-step). Personally I am not in favor of marijuana being legalized, but I’m not against it either, my opinion on it is simple, it does not affect me directly. I do think that the legalization of marijuana is something that’s inedible the question is how much is the government going to fight this? I believe that there are way more serious issues that should be in a higher priority that the control of marijuana, money is wasted over such an insignificant issue. “The Journal acknowledged that prosecutorial resources are indeed limited and that some crimes are a higher priority than others.” (http://www.newsmax.com/US/obama-marijuana-law-disregard/2013/09/05/id/524068). Yes, it does seem like president Obama is just ignoring the law, I believe he doesn’t want to waste his time at the moment with something so insignificant and rather put all his attention on something much more important.