|Now do you understand the saying:|
"The law is black and white, human interpretation makes it grey."
My view: As you said it's a saying not a statement of fact. It is meant to convey the idea that the law is not wrong but also not totalitarian. Or to put it another way; the law is not open to interpretation but how you prosecute the law is.
So if you have a law that says the maximum speed limit on a motorway is 70 mph. The human factor can give a valid argument about the reasonable expectation of the accuracy of a cars speedometer and the accuracy and calibration of a radar gun used to detect a speeding car. This brings in the greyness of lets say 70-77 mph where you may be braking the law but genuinely think you are not.
To a degree, I agree with this saying but it is also not what I was saying originally.
|Grey Wolf said he couldn't see how law could be black and white but interpreted grey. He just showed one way it can be black and white and interpreted grey with his post about the Data Protection Act in the UK. We covered how it is in terms of lawyers and judges, but for an everyday person he answered his own question of how the law can be black and white, but be misinterpreted (through simple human error of misreading it or misunderstanding what the law is saying).|
I believe that I said "I can not see how something can be Black and White but still be open to interpretation."
But any how, In a previous post
you used phrases such as "that causes no confusion"
and "says very clearly"
in describing 'black and white'. As that section of the act does not say very clearly and did cause confusion* it does not meet my criteria and apparently yours, unless you are going to change your definition, for being black and white.
In terms of its meaning, once you determine what it is, it is not open for interpretation.
* I made the mistake of only reading through it once , not the two or three times that I normal do when reading UK statutes.
My original point was that all laws are not universal and they are not black and white. I gave my definition of Law and Black and White.
"Grey areas of the law" came up somewhere along the line and I gave my definition
So at this point I see three different topics going on, I think others are seeing it as the same.
Sorry I don't see a question involving double talk. What I will say is that double talk is a case of not being black and white. I have had to work with a certain area of law across three different countries, to make sure the product we supply into those countries meet the regulations. Two of those countries, the law is very clear cut easy to read and quite black and white. The UK on the other hand is not, it is the legal equivalent of obfuscated spaghetti code.
Another aspect of a law being black and white or not would be along the lines of boolean logic verses fuzzy logic. The UK has a law that, paraphrasing, you can use reasonable force in defending yourself or your property. What level of force is reasonable is determined after the fact, so this is fuzzy not black and white.