>>65 Another way to put it is that the law means what judges decide it to mean, not what it says, and judges are humans, not machines. They judge laws by what they believe their intent to be, and by how they are phrased, in some mixed proportion that varies according to the judge.
This is more of a /newpol/ issue, I think, but then what's the point of written law if any written word means nothing until you apply interpretation?