View Single Post
  #25  
Old 10-09-2011, 02:21 AM
uber069 uber069 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Pearse View Post
It's not really a legal document but rather a guidance document expanding on the requirements of the regulations. I'm trying to get hold of the document itself, I was taking someone's word that the preamble wasn't there.

Edit: It's ok, I've found the preamble, "should" means a person is "encouraged" to do something while "must" and "shall" mean they are required to do it.
"should" is an intonation that the intended is doing something wrong, it is a retort or reproof. This is contrary to law as an imperfect being cannot judge another imperfect being as imperfect. God alone can judge his creation. Legally it may be used as a conjoinder to further a sentence vocabularily. Any attorney worth his or her salt will not use "should" as a pretext or the primary basis of any point of their procedure.

"shall" is another fun word which intones violence or at least imposition upon the subject were they to refuse the contract; a threat of force. Lawfully, nothing can be imposed except the subject has caused harm, loss or injury with lawful evidence to support and in the past, lawful punishments were based upon not precedent but the will of the peers, as it should be, with standardized punishments and regard. The legal process however approaches precedent as almost a religion regarding punishment for crime.

"must" on the other hand, is synonymous with "may", as in, "you may choose to contract with >us< (commercial).

Law is fair and reveres and protects life

Legal is unfair and defers to procedure and obfuscation

forgive if I am repeating someone here already, I have not yet read all replies