A Range of Law Dictionaries

[BaldBeardyDude]

Indeed, my friend, in....deed....

[macswin]

sorry to say i haven't bitten the dust, nor do i have the wrong end of the stick, and i really don't care about what you think of me personally.

To put forth my case. All i did was put a selection of books of legal words and their meanings into a forum called "legal words and their meanings" which confers to your logic by your creation of the said forum. Later I contested one of the conclusions put forth by Veronica on the subject of legalese, which was ignored, as is her right. Then every argument I have put forth has been summarily dismissed because i do not possess the knowledge and truth you deem to possess. you say i have the wrong end of the stick, yet do not tell me why. So i went to read Veronica's book to inform myself, which is probably why you thought I left.

Unfortunately, after reading it,Veronica's truth (and surely here admirers) is a mismatch of other many authors works (mainly Menard, Croft, Maxwell, icke and John Harris), which have been bastardised to suit your own opinions. you provide few sources, if any, to your arguments. You make sweeping statements without backing them up. your understanding of many topics in your book is shallow at best, and then you, a confirmed atheist, tell people to use it as their bible. Your arrogance is astounding, as i have found through looking through this forum more carefully, you condescend and insult people who disagree with you and laud the ones that agree with you.

Your motto for this site is "Fear is cured by defensive action based on knowledge." How far you have strayed from this! Your fear of any knowledge but your own is worthy of any dictator. You are a despot in your own very little kingdom, who seems to exile anyone who disagrees with you. I can see that being told you are wrong is one of your fears, as your treatment of me by you and your mods has exhibited.

I fear by your actions with me you doom the very movement you profess to uphold. i believe it is your way or the highway. I will remain on this forum to discuss, debate, argue and contend until i am thrown out.

I guess everybody is free, it's just some are more free than others


EDIT BY JOBSABOBA..YOU ARE GETTING VERY CLOSE TO TROLLING BE CAREFULL !

[BaldBeardyDude]

Macswin - I merely pointed out that the wrong end of a stick had been grasped - I did not mean by you alone. I have no wish to, nor do I think I did, insult you.

I thank you for your post and link to some very good reference works.

As for anything else, I do not want any misunderstanding on this - nothing else was inferred, meant, hinted at or otherwise intended on my part.

Peace and love,

Baldy (Pete)

And yes, you are getting very close to a small rickety-rackety bridge. Please stop before the goats get here - it could be messy

[macswin]

I am sorry for trolling (never knew what that meant-had to look it up)

a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion

this was not my intention if I have done any of the above things, i just felt I was defending my position.

I then respectfully ask one of the moderators or admins to please delete my account and all my posts, because knowing myself I will probably defend my position as passionately as you defend yours.

I will trouble you no more

Good luck in your endeavours

[kevin]

someone from tpuc (thanks nutty_norm) has asked the law society which dictionary they use and they cant tell you

http://www.tpuc.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2799

As far as our library is aware, there is no one single source used in
the UK for legal definitions. Solicitors contact the library for
definitions which may come from a range of sources. In addition, we are
only able to comment on where definitions may be found within our own
collection; there may be other sources of legal definitions which the
library does not hold or have access to. If you wish to know the
dictionaries used within the HM Court Service, I suggest you contact the
courts directly for this information. From our library's own holdings,
two of the best known dictionaries giving details of where to find legal
definitions are the following:

1) Stroud's judicial dictionary of words and phrases. 7th ed (2007,
Sweet and Maxwell)
(this dictionary provides details of where words have been judicially
defined by the court)

2) Words and phrases legally defined. 4th ed (2008, LNB)
(this dictionary provides details of where words have been defined
within legislation)

In addition from our own experience, solicitors may request definitions
from a range of sources including the Oxford English Dictionary. The
consolidated index to Halsbury's Laws of England (4th and 5th eds) also
has a section called words and phrases which directs users to specific
passages within the 50+ volume publication. Legal definitions are often
found within the body of legislation; quite often Acts have a specific
section entitled definitions. Dictionaries such as Words and Phrases
note where these definitions may be found. In addition to these sources
the library has a further 22 dictionaries in our current law
dictionaries section and these provide information on legal definitions,
legal maxims, latin phrases etc. We also hold a range of other legal
dictionaries. Details of our library's holdings of legal dictionaries
can be found on the library's catalogue
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/libraryonline. Select the Books search,
enter the phrase legal dictionaries within the keyword search box to
retrieve details of the dictionaries we hold. For your information, we
do not hold Black's law dictionary, 8th ed (2004).

As I mentioned before, this information is taken solely from our
library's holdings and should not be taken as a definitive list of
sources or as a recommendation should you wish to purchase or refer to
any of them.

Yours sincerely

Bob Stanley

[Farmer]

Finally I must thank you so much Veronica for providing this forum, as it has been a while since i have entered into a debate (not an argument) it is immensely enjoyable

Well I hope you stick around and continue posting. It is not enough to know that you are right when others can simply ignore that and impose their will upon you by creating something that they project as being correct. Knowing thy enemy and understanding their tools is important to me. Apart from that, even if someone posts something silly or not understandable, that may well trigger a thought that will lead to something worthwhile.

[Farmer]

someone from tpuc (thanks nutty_norm) has asked the law society which dictionary they use and they cant tell you

I think their reply was clear, they use several.

[jobsaboba]

A LOT OF PEOPLE I KNOW ...TALK BOLLOX.
SHOULD I LEARN BOLLOX IN ORDER TO CONVERSE WITH THEM ?
OR JUST POINT OUT THAT THEY ARE TALKIN BOLLOX

jobs

[kevin]

I dont understand how you could possibly use several different dictionaries? if they happen to have different definitions in them where does that leave you? talking a different language! if they are all the same why do you need several?

you could write up your documents and they say..oh we're not using that dictionary today, that's just crazy

[Farmer]

A LOT OF PEOPLE I KNOW ...TALK BOLLOX.
SHOULD I LEARN BOLLOX IN ORDER TO CONVERSE WITH THEM ?
OR JUST POINT OUT THAT THEY ARE TALKIN BOLLOX

jobs

You are missing the point: in order to understand what you have just posted, I have to know that 'bollox' mean 'bollocks'. That is really all macswin was saying.