SBM Blog will not be commenting as a rule on the Carnival of Oversimplification that is the political campaign season, but as a lawyer it's hard not to muse at least a little on the pronouncement "there's no law against stupidity" in response to the J.P. Morgan trading loss fiasco. Fact is, legislators throughout history have tried to create incentives against behavior that society agrees, for the moment at least, is stupid. Granted, those laws may be based on bad assumptions and thus may themselves be stupid, but at least some of the laws (bans on driving while intoxicated, for example) qualify as a defensible response to stupid human behavior. More importantly, the law strives to hold folks accountable when their stupid behavior harms others. I don't know whether the Volcker Rule would have prevented the J.P Morgan mess or whether more stringent regulation is a good idea, but it does seem important that the public realize that sometimes the law is a better response to human stupidity than a fatalistic attitude of "stupid happens."