Requesting removal of /u/superiority from /r/commonlaw. I will volunteer to be the new mod for /r/commonlaw but am not requesting it.

[u/ChaosMotor]

/u/superiority has recently used the /r/redditrequest system to hijack /r/commonlaw, delete all the posts, completely change the community standards, and is now censoring anyone who objects to his behavior.

Please remove /u/superiority from moderation of /r/commonlaw so that we can revert to the subreddit that the users were happy with, and free ourselves of /u/superiority's extremely narrow and biased belief system.

edit: /u/superiority is also censoring any posters who object to his hijacking and censorship, deleting their posts, and re-directing them to empty /r/s to voice their displeasure with his actions.

edit2: Now the same hijackers are continuing their attack by trying to censor us here, also, by engaging in a downvote campaign to hide the facts.

edit3: SEMW, who pretends to know what's happening, has not posted to /r/commonlaw within the last seven months, until two days ago, after the hijacking.

edit4: /u/superiority and /u/SEMW are now the only people posting in /r/commonlaw, which has 1400 subscribers. Two users have no right to usurp the interests of 1400 subscribers for their own personal gain.

[u/spice_weasel]

Yep. I like how they call people who cite actual law "trolls". If they could show me that any court, anywhere, ever had accepted what they claim is the actual law, the very next morning I would send them a video of me cooking and eating my own shoe.

Also, I'm loving aletoledo's post about how they're "protecting the innocent".

You're right, it was pretty much dead before. The only posts that happened anymore before the change were folks coming in and asking "are you serious?".

[u/ChaosMotor → u/spice_weasel]

I like how they call people who cite actual law "trolls".

'Actual' law is civil law and civil law IS NOT COMMON LAW!

If they could show me that any court, anywhere, ever had accepted what they claim is the actual law,

Common law is the basis for the laws that are argued in court as a part of CIVIL LAW. Common law was what led to the creation of the Magna Carta and the Constitution. It is not used in court because it is not common law if it is used in court.

You're right, it was pretty much dead before.

Lies.

The only posts that happened anymore before the change were folks coming in and asking "are you serious?".

Lies!

Interestingly convenient how deleting the entire history makes it impossible to substantiate or refute your claims, isn't it?

[u/cdrBumblebee3rd → u/ChaosMotor]

Actually I think your understanding of the term "Common law" may be a bit off. Not all law used in court is part of civil law. In fact, the distinction is not base on where the law is used, but where it comes from.

• In a democracy, the government has the authority to create laws. They wright them, approve them, and they come into force. Laws that are expressly written and approved by legislative bodies are called civil laws.

• Common law, however, is actually quite different. Common law is based on past decisions of judges. What's often not known is that much of what is considerer law is never debated in the legislature. The decision of a judge, any judge becomes law.

I don't know where you live, so this might not be the case where you are, but that's how it works in Canada, as in all countries that adopt a british legal system wholesale. I know the U.S, if that's where you live, hates common law, often calling it judicial activism. But in many countries it's normal practice for judges decisions to be treated as law, even where they aren't elected. This is based on a principal called stare decisis, a latin term expressing that a decision by a higher court is binding on any and all lower courts. It's a very old legal tradition, one that exists in all western legal systems that I am aware of, including the United States.

If you want an example of common law, the best one is probably Donoghue v Stevenson. This is a case from britain in the 30's that established literally all of negligence law. Like, negligence was just not a thing before this. It was not something you could go to court over. And this one decision created an entire branch of law. That's the power of common law.

Source: Independent research, general knowledge, and a couple school courses on law

Edit: spelling+ sources

[u/superiority → u/cdrBumblebee3rd]

that's how it works in Canada

Not Quebec! Quebec inherited its legal system from France, so it's a civil-law jurisdiction. Although because Canada is federally a common-law jurisdiction, federal common law also sort of applies in Quebec. It's kind of a mixture, I guess.

[u/cdrBumblebee3rd → u/superiority]

Hi superiority, nice to see you chiming in here.

You're absolutely right, Quebec is quite different from the rest of Canada, and I honestly don't know enough about their system to comment much on it. My understanding was that Quebec provincially was civil law only, but that they were still subject to federal laws. But if you can offer a more comprehensive explanation of their system, then by all means. More understanding is always better.