Arrogant Freeloading "Information" Seeking Asshats!

Referencing a recent thread just closed, I thought symmetry required that someone rant about people who come into this (and other) message board looking for free “information” about their legal cases. Too damn chintzy to pay for the advice they need. Forgetful in the process that the “information” they get is worth exactly what they paid for it.

All you freeloading advice-seeking refuse-to-listen when we say what you don’t want to hear people: I dub thee AssHats!!! Go mooch off of someone else! :mad:
(Sadly, that’s a fake angry face. I’m not able to work up a good hatred of such behavior; mostly I just laugh at it). :smack:

Lawyers aren’t very good at alliteration, are they?

You have to pay extra for that

Low cost to free legal services are readily available in the following areas:

Divorce and custody
Domestic violence
Landlord-tenant/other housing
Public Benefits
some basic employment and health
And of course, criminal issues.

So if someone has an issue that falls outside of these areas, what would you recommend that they do? (It’s a serious question. I’ve been trying for months…)

There are also issue organizations (like the NRA or the ACLU) that handle disputes with the government.

What area does your issue fall into?

Hire a lawyer.

Serious answer.

Pay for an attorney’s time.

ETA: Goddamnit Frank, why be you so fast?

Yeah, I’ll remember next time what freeloading bitches people are when they ask a question about Massage Therapy too!

What can’t be bothered to pay for a massage therapist?

It’s funny how lawyers think that every bit of talk about their profession is worth money meanwhile everyone else gives out free advice all the time.

My friend who is an acupuncturist/massage therapist said he wanted a portable credit card reader so he could charge people any time he was asked for advice. He was of course joking, only a lawyer would really do it. :wink:

Hire a hitman. 'Course, you may still end up in front of a judge.

She’s still looking for “low-cost to free” to be properties of whatever answers that question elicits.

Just pointing that out. If it’s not possible to meet that parameter, it might not hurt to explicitly say so.

Who the hell asks for “massage advice”?

Whatever. I have to pay for malpractice insurance and I’m only covered for specific areas of law. Which is why I don’t give out advice to people that I meet for areas of law which I’m not covered for. My insurance carrier would probably cover me if I was sued for giving advice outside my covered areas, but then it would be very expensive for me to get insurance afterwards.

How’s your massage therapy insurance going?

Massage Advice: Need Answer Fast!

Ok, so I was rubbing my girlfriend’s lower back and I felt some popping noises. I thought this might be trouble, but she seemed to like it. Fast forward to tonight and wants me to do it again. Massage therapists, I know I’m not your client, yadda yadda, but how do I repeat this maneuver? I’m in NY if it helps.

I’ve been following along with Stoid’s thread, and although she is somewhat hard-headed, I really feel a lot of sympathy for her. The attitudes of the attorneys in that thread, and the OP here, just show that the reality in this country is that justice is only available to people who can afford it. And attorneys fees are outrageously expensive, prohibitively so for many working-class and mid-income people.

If you’re living from paycheck-to-paycheck, or are unemployed, and you find yourself in trouble with the law (anything from criminal charges, to a civil dispute, to tax problems), sorry, you’re SOL. Justice is only for people who can find an extra $5,000 here or $10,000 there - and that is a HELL of a lot of money for most Americans. When you have to choose between this and paying your rent or putting food on the table, or filling your car with gas, sorry, you’re shit outta luck.

Attorneys like the OP seem to claim a monopoly on knowledge, a monopoly on information that is readily accessible to those who actively seek it. They ridicule people who seek out this knowledge on their own in a time of need, who can’t afford the high prices of a degreed and licensed professional.

There are a lot of things people can successfully learn to do themselves which might otherwise be out of financial reach. Home improvement, car repair, web design, even health and medical issues. With the wealth of information available to us, one can learn as much as they want about as many subjects as they want. It is very unfair to assume that unless you spend the money on a law degree and pass a test, that you cannot possibly learn the law.

What do people like the OP and Frank and Sleeps suggest that someone who needs a lawyer’s services but cannot afford them do? Just plead guilty and go to jail? Allow people to sue them for everything they are worth? Allow people to trod unhindered on their civil rights??

This attitude strikes me as seriously pretentious. Just because you have an expensive degree doesn’t mean you own the information you were taught, and that laypeople have no right or ability to learn it on their own if they need to.

oddly enough I don’t think he is an actual lawyer.ICBW
-nyctea: tell you what, you get a law passed to forgive my student loans and I’ll give the occasional free consultation.

And if you don’t have the money to hire a lawyer?

Oh please. Pretentious? Whatever. Nobody owns the information they are taught, but they sure as hell aren’t required to give away their time and their ideas for free to those who refuse to do their own research. Libraries have loads of information you can peruse for free. There are books available for people who choose to forgo the attorneys and represent themselves.

And are we talking about the civil rights of someone who posted someone else’s porn up on a website and charged people to view it?

The problem isn’t that she can’t get legal aid. The problem is that she already lost, and she’s looking for the magic fix that will let her have a do-over. She thinks that there is some lawyer out there who is so good that he will immediately direct her to the one case that is exactly like hers, and she will triumphantly brandish it in court whereupon the flow of time will reverse and she will be adjudged triumphant.

Sadly, this is not how the real world or the court system works, and Stoid cannot/will not comprehend that the practice of law isn’t a bunch of special words that you say to win; it’s just convincing the judge/jury that you are right, while remaining more or less close to the rules that have been set down, but being skillful enough to make your case unique. It’s not like the division of property between two parties is some obscure legal specialty, either; it’s one of the most commonly litigated civil issues.

I also find it amusing that she closed the other thread and then has the nerve to continue trying to tell everyone she doesn’t need a lawyer, and that none will work for her, because her case is sooooooo unusual that no mortal lawyer can comprehend it, yet she refuses to say anything about her case other than some weird and ultimately worthless personal information while she is asking for legal advice^H^H^H^H information.


Dumb. There’s a significant difference between law and massage (other than that law doesn’t usually give you a happy ending). Lawyers pretty much, by definition, sell advice. Hence “counselor”. Doctors do the same thing (they write prescriptions, we write briefs), and I am pretty sure they don’t like to talk about your rash at a cocktail party, either. They, of course, also have to be careful about giving advice because of those pesky ethical considerations.

Furthermore, there is this whole class of people called “consultants” who do nothing but dispense advice. Those sons of bitches must be total dicks for not giving away advice for free – they don’t even have ethical rules and malpractice to worry about!

I’m not speaking for the other posters you’ve mentioned here, and I didn’t read the other thread.

However, this is the reality an attorney faces: in most states it is possible to form a client-attorney relationship by giving advice. Which means the attorney faces a possible malpractice suit each time he gives out advice. On top of that, the malpractice insurance carriers all have their own restrictions (for example, my carrier insists that I have an engagement letter with all my clients, so if someone asks me for advice, even if I could give it out for free, I’d have to insist on an engagement letter).

Attorney’s have to make a business decision about this. There is a real risk of costs to the attorney for giving out legal advice, and that risk has to be balanced by income to the attorney. That’s just business.

Aside from this, there are a large number of free and low-cost legal resources available for the poor, and all of them are dependent on the services of attorneys to function (many of whom take pay cuts or work for free to make that happen).

And finally, yeah, sometimes people cause you a harm and they get away with it, because you can’t afford to sue them. This happens to the richest corporations too, except we say “it’s not worth it to sue them.” I have several clients who didn’t sue when they had a right to, because the guy who caused them harm is a deadbeat, and even if all the attorney services were free, the court fees alone would make suing uneconomical. It’s not fair, but it happens.

If you can’t afford an attorney, then you have to make do with the low-cost and free services available. This is true for everything, from food to medical care to housing. I don’t see why attorneys get singled out for blame in this.

You are. :stuck_out_tongue:

Now, if you said “I don’t think he is a practicing lawyer,” you would be accurate. :wink: