The Laws are designed to define correct procedure, and to provide an adequate remedy when there is a departure from correct procedure. An offending player should be ready to pay any penalty graciously, or to accept any adjusted score awarded by the Tournament Director. The Laws are primarily designed not as punishment for irregularities, but rather as redress for damage.
Prior to the 1987 Laws words such as may, should, shall and must were used without much discrimination. In 1987 they were rationalised, and the practice is continued in the current Laws. When these Laws say that a player "may" do something ("any player may call attention to an irregularity during the auction"), the failure to do it is not wrong. A simple declaration that a player "does" something ("....dummy spreads his hand in front of him...") establishes correct procedure without any suggestion that a violation be penalised. When a player "should" do something ("a claim should be accompanied at once by a statement..."), his failure to do it is an infraction of Law, which will jeopardise his rights, but which will seldom incur a procedural penalty. In contrast, when these Laws say that a player "shall" do something ("No player shall take any action until the Director has explained...."), a violation will be penalised more often than not. The strongest word, "must" ("before making a call, he must inspect the face of his cards"), indicates that violation is regarded as serious. Note that "may" becomes very strong in the negative: "may not" is a stronger injunction than "shall not", just short of "must not".
A great deal of effort has been expended to make these Laws easy to use. References from one Law to another have been made more explicit. The hundreds of headings and sub-headings can help a Director find the section of a Law that is applicable to the facts of a case (these headings are for convenience of reference only; headings are not considered to be part of the Laws).
