Oh, so you meant that it did not deserve any attention? Well, my ego is hurt, but I comfort myself with the thought that now that I’ve learned this incredibly witty and original line, I shall use it myself in the future, possibly with almost as great effect as you have.
Beyond this very important matter, it does not appear that any new ground is being broken here, so I shall let things stand where they are.
IzzyR: I shall let things stand where they are.
Not before time, either, IMHO. Y’know, Izzy, I often appreciate your acute attention to detail in a debate, and I even have a grudging respect for your fierce resistance to being considered in the wrong, but it seems to me that this is one occasion where a simple “Oops, sorry” several posts ago could have saved you not only a hurt ego but a whole lot of unnecessary arguing. Especially when tangling with another of the bulldog breed, like Jodi.
(Now they can both pounce on me together and peace and amity will be restored over my shredded corpse. :))
I don’t consider that any apologies were necessary for anything - certainly not from me. My general policy is not so much to avoid being considered in the wrong - that is frequently beyond my control, but rather to get to the point where my position has been explained to the point that I am satisfied that a reasonable and unbiased person will see its merits. When dealing with people who like to reinterpret my words, that process can sometimes be lengthened, unfortunately. My hurt ego (such as it is 
) takes care of itself.
december: What Kimstu said. Besides, there are already many criminal law standards where the outcome depends on what is or is not “reasonable.” If you have a concrete example of one that you disagree with, feel free to share. But Kimstu is absolutely correct in stating that the problem with “unreasonably bad behavior” is primarily the “bad behavior,” not the “unreasonable.”
Izzy & Jodi: Although Jodi is perfectly correct about defining “common law,” I do want to point out that there’s a tiny nugget of truth in Izzy’s assertion that it includes the customs and practices of the people. As a matter of fact, judges certainly have looked (and still do) to how people have handled problems without judicial intervention. But customs and practices do not become law until adopted as such by the legislature or the courts.
Of course, if I missed that point being made already, I want to chalk it up to the fact that I’m still on Ireland time. Damn jet lag . . .
And it’s good to see you back, Jodi!