Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - kmpnj

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57
Current Law Students / How do you start a Law Journal
« on: August 23, 2007, 06:20:52 AM »
I was wondering if anyone has had any experience creating a Law Journal at their school.  We have two journals/reviews at my school:  a general law review and one that focuses on corporate law.  I would like to createa law journal that examines administrative law and public policy issues, such as the formation of the Department of Homeland Security.  If anyone has any idea on how I would go about starting this, please let me know.

Current Law Students / Re: True Horror Story
« on: June 29, 2007, 10:01:15 AM »
This is why I'm a HUGE believer in the pre-emptive strike.  I usually volunteer for about 10 minutes or so, then I'm done for the class, unless something being said is particularly interesting.


So, riddle me this, batman...

How does volunteering for 10 minutes, and then not saying anything for the remaining 1 hour 5 minutes plus, make me a gunner?

A gunner is someone who talks all the time, usually with no point to what they are saying, other than to hear the wonderful sounds of their melodious voices.  Clearly, If the total class time is 75 minutes, and I volunteer for only 20% of it (at most), that would leave wholly 80% of the class time where the only communicating I'm doing is on IM.

If you think that makes me a gunner, maybe you are projecting your own "gunner-ness" upon me.  Maybe you're the type who has to say everything, all the time, and hates whenever anyone else dares to answer a question in class, because they clearly don't know the answer, because they are not nearly as brilliant as you are.

Current Law Students / Re: "Right To Bear Arms"
« on: June 29, 2007, 08:50:09 AM »
One thing that has always bothered me with 2nd Amendment debates, as fascinating as I find them, is one argument pro-gun control people make that the 2nd Amendment was enacted so that people could raise militias for the defense of the country.

Article I of the Constitution gives the Congress the right to raise an army and provide for the national defense.  Article II of the Constitution gives the Executive the Commander in Chief power.  I think, as law students, we can all agree on this, right?

So, here's my question...Since Art. I gives Congress the right to raise an army and provide for the national defense and Congress is designed to be representative of the people, why would you need the 2nd Amendment to provide the people with the right to raise their own militias?  Wouldn't that be repetitive?  Especially since Art. I came before the 2nd Amendment.

It would seem to me that the 2nd Amendment shows that the founders knew what we seem to have forgotten in the current "Government as mommy/daddy/welfare provider" state that is the United States. That in order to protect this nation from devolving into tyranny, it is vital that the people be armed, so that they can protect themselves against government tyranny.  This is especially so when the 2nd Amendment (indeed, the entire bill of rights) is taken in context.  The Bill of Rights arose as a compromise between those who wanted the Constitution to be ratified as was originally drafted (sans BOR) and those who felt that the Constitution, as originally drafted, was lacking in protection of individual rights.  The Bill of Rights was created as a compact between the federal government and individuals, guaranteeing the rights of the individual that the government could not encroach upon.  Again, it is important to remember the context in which this event occurred.  The United States had just emancipated itself from British rule.  The Bill of Rights was enacted to prevent the Federal government from behaving in a manner similar to King George's British government.  One of the methods of controlling the colonies was to prevent colonials from arming themselves.  The only people in Colonial America who really had guns were those on the frontier and those who fought with the British in the French and Indian Wars, which were largely the ones who fought in the Revolutionary War.

Based on the Historical Context of the Bill of Rights' ratification period, it would seem to me that the 2nd Amendment would largely be meant as a mechanism through which individuals have the right to arm themselves for protection against government tyranny.  Now, granted, as society has evolved, we have largely found other ways to prevent government tyranny, mostly through the ballot box.  However, just because we, largely, no longer choose to enter into armed conflict with the government, does not mean we forfeit the right that that amendment guarantees, which is the right to arm ourselves.  Just as I still have the right to consume alcoholic beverages, without interference from the federal government, even though I no longer choose to do so.

As for the lack of incorporation of the 2nd Amendment goes, the DC circuit, this past spring, ruled that the 2nd Amendment is incorporated by the 14th Amendment, thereby creating a split in opinion among the circuits.  I believe this matter is on the Court's calendar next term, so it should be interesting to see how the Roberts Court deals with this issue.

Lastly, from a practical standpoint, the problem with gun violence is caused, largely, by criminals.  Most criminals don't go into Wal-Mart or any other commercial dealer of firearms to purchase guns to use in criminal acts.  They go to Manny who sells them from the trunk of his 68 Impala.  Manny's guns (or whoever the local gun dealer is) have the added advantage of having the serial numbers burned off with acid and having the firing pin and cylinder filed down to take away any marks on the shell casings which would lead police to distinguish a .40 caliber round that came from, say, a Smith and Wesson versus a .40 caliber round that came from a Glock, thus hindering police investigation.  Therefore, it would seem to me, that if we banned guns tomorrow, the people we don't want to have guns (criminals) would still be able to purchase an AR-15 or AK 47 from Manny, the local gun dealer.

Current Law Students / Re: Druggie at Law School.....Pissed!
« on: June 13, 2007, 03:53:47 PM »
Instead of letting the green-eyed monster loose, OP should be a decent person and congratulate the old stoner for his success. Then again, if he did that, he wouldn't be able to piss and moan about it and thus he would have nothing with which to fulfill his astonishingly dull and dreary life.

Current Law Students / Re: Waiting for grades....
« on: June 05, 2007, 06:07:56 PM »
Our school requires grades to be in within 30 days of the last final exam.  Only one of my grades is still out (there's a way to tell through our website, even though they haven't released the grades yet.) and its legal methods, which was turned in April 12th.  I think they take so long so as to screw up those who want to transfer.  Friggin ridiculous.

Current Law Students / Re: Con Law Multiple Choice Questions
« on: May 07, 2007, 08:37:29 PM »
I used the Q&A books put out by Lexis and felt that they prepared me well for the multiple choice portion of the exam.  I don't know if your library will have it, but the bookstore definitely will.

Current Law Students / Re: PLEASE HELP! HUGE PROBLEM!
« on: May 07, 2007, 08:08:20 PM »
To follow up on the previous entry, might I suggest a 'Rusty Trombone?"

Current Law Students / Re: Parol Evidence?
« on: April 26, 2007, 09:50:29 PM »
I thought the questions that Emanuel's asks on this subject are quite good also.

Current Law Students / Re: PLEASE HELP! HUGE PROBLEM!
« on: April 06, 2007, 11:39:17 PM »

Current Law Students / Re: Anyone do law preview?
« on: April 06, 2007, 11:28:05 PM »
I did law preview last year.  I took it right before the fall semester and found it helpful in getting my brain back in working order after the summer off.  The professors were fantastic.  It is expensive, but its an opportunity to sit in on lectures given by some of the best law professors in the country and to get your brain working in the type of way that it needs to in law school.

I can't impress upon you enough that law school is completely different than anything I've ever done.  Different from undergrad, the military or law enforcement.  Its not necessarily more stressful, just stressful in a different way.  Any tool that you can use to get your brain working in that kind of way, take it.  Think of law preview as a kind of law school boot camp.  You can start to work in that different kind of way there, where there are no grades so you can make as many mistakes as you want and it doesn't cost you.

One caveat though, for exams I would use "Getting to Maybe."  That book is awesome.  It really breaks down the exams and was helpful to me.

Good Luck in whatever you decide.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 57