Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - crusader918

Pages: [1] 2
1
Thanks Sarahz and Kristi.

To answer both of your questions: 

Whittier is a good LS but Whittier is located in Costa Mesa.  The drive is equivalent to driving to Downtown L.A. Ditto for Chapman, which is in Orange, CA.  Both schools are great, but their location is similar to Downtown L.A...Besides, I can get a job transfer to the Downtown L.A. area.  The drive home is about 1 hr after 10 P.M.

I'm focused on my priorities.  However, I'm just looking to see which decision carries the lightest burden.

Thank you so much,
Crusader

2
I can't erase the other three.

When I created the first post, it prompted an error message three times.  Thus, I kept pushing the post button.  Sorry about that.  I can't erase my own posts. 

3
Thanks everyone, I appreciate your posts

Please forgive for the multiple posts (especially Ginatio).  I kept getting an error and I kept pressing the post button to make sure.  Sorry.

I really want to attend Loyola.  Loyola was my dream law school ever since high school.  Southwestern is my second choice, but Whittier, Chapman amd USC are on my list but not serious contenders.  Western State?  Not in the running.

I'm just trying to weigh my options and decide whether that 1 hr commute in the a.m. is worth it.  Commuting from the Inland Empire is not easy.  I live about 4 miles west from the 15 freeway off of Grove Ave and the 60 freeway.  I just don't want to burn myself out. Like I said the job transfer is easy, finding residence is very difficult.  I could take the Metro-Link train, but it costs a lot of money and has not service after 8:50 P.M.

Again, thank you very much for your posts,
Crusader


4
Thank you everyone, :)

I sorry about the multiple posts.  I was getting an error and I was afraid that my post wasn't going through.

I might be wasting my time with LaVerne, but LaVerne has enormous potential.  Brand new law school, California State bar accreditation and close location makes it very convenient.  Not to mention their Dean was a member of the ABA accreditation committee before being hired at LaVerne.  So I can suspect that Mr. Dunn has LaVerne steered in the right direction.

Also, if I select Loyola or SouthWestern then I would get a job transfer to the Downtown L.A. area and go straight to school after work.  The only drawback is the drive home at 10 p.m.

Again thank you,
Crusader

5
Hi everyone...

I am have some location decision issues and I would welcome everyone's candid and courteous opinion and/or advice.

If u don't know my background: URM, Non-Trad., Married, work full-time (exp. 15 years).

My dilemma is this:

My schools of choice are Southwestern and Loyola Law School. Both are in the Downtown L.A. area. Unfortunately, I live in Ontario, California (Inland Empire), which is about 45 miles east from Los Angeles, CA. Travel time to Los Angeles is about an hour in the morning and about two hours in the evenings due to traffic. :( I currently work in the San Bernardino, CA area, but getting a transfer to work in the Downtown L.A. may not be difficult. Unfortunately, I cannot get a house in the L.A. area due to the high prices of houses and condo's (median for a house in the L.A. area: $375K, condo: $300K).

There is a bright spot though. I live in the area near LaVerne School of Law (in my city of residence, about ten minutes away). Great school, great faculty, blah, blah, blah. BUT THE SCHOOL IS NOT ABA ACCREDITED! IT'S ACCREDITED BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, BUT NOT ACCREDITED BY THE ABA!

The ABA went to LaVerne last October for an Accreditation review and assessment, but the school has not received any word from the ABA. As of this date, still no ABA provisional accreditation.

My question to everyone is: Should I gut it out? Should I make the one hour commute to Los Angeles, working during the day, going to Loyola or Southwestern at night? Or should I go to a LaVerne, which is a non-ABA, but State Bar-accredited Law school?

I could transfer later from an non-ABA school to an ABA school, but that's a crapshoot. I won't be guaranteed a spot in an ABA school as a transfer.

Any advice would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks,
Crusader

6
Hi everyone...

I am have some location decision issues and I would welcome everyone's candid and courteous opinion and/or advice.

If u don't know my background: URM, Non-Trad., Married, work full-time (exp. 15 years).

My dilemma is this:

My schools of choice are Southwestern and Loyola Law School. Both are in the Downtown L.A. area. Unfortunately, I live in Ontario, California (Inland Empire), which is about 45 miles east from Los Angeles, CA. Travel time to Los Angeles is about an hour in the morning and about two hours in the evenings due to traffic. :( I currently work in the San Bernardino, CA area, but getting a transfer to work in the Downtown L.A. may not be difficult. Unfortunately, I cannot get a house in the L.A. area due to the high prices of houses and condo's (median for a house in the L.A. area: $375K, condo: $300K).

There is a bright spot though. I live in the area near LaVerne School of Law (in my city of residence, about ten minutes away). Great school, great faculty, blah, blah, blah. BUT THE SCHOOL IS NOT ABA ACCREDITED! IT'S ACCREDITED BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, BUT NOT ACCREDITED BY THE ABA!

The ABA went to LaVerne last October for an Accreditation review and assessment, but the school has not received any word from the ABA. As of this date, still no ABA provisional accreditation.

My question to everyone is: Should I gut it out? Should I make the one hour commute to Los Angeles, working during the day, going to Loyola or Southwestern at night? Or should I go to a LaVerne, which is a non-ABA, but State Bar-accredited Law school?

I could transfer later from an non-ABA school to an ABA school, but that's a crapshoot. I won't be guaranteed a spot in an ABA school as a transfer.

Any advice would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks,
Crusader

7
Hi everyone...

I am have some location decision issues and I would welcome everyone's candid and courteous opinion and/or advice.

If u don't know my background: URM, Non-Trad., Married, work full-time (exp. 15 years).

My dilemma is this:

My schools of choice are Southwestern and Loyola Law School. Both are in the Downtown L.A. area. Unfortunately, I live in Ontario, California (Inland Empire), which is about 45 miles east from Los Angeles, CA. Travel time to Los Angeles is about an hour in the morning and about two hours in the evenings due to traffic. :( I currently work in the San Bernardino, CA area, but getting a transfer to work in the Downtown L.A. may not be difficult. Unfortunately, I cannot get a house in the L.A. area due to the high prices of houses and condo's (median for a house in the L.A. area: $375K, condo: $300K).

There is a bright spot though. I live in the area near LaVerne School of Law (in my city of residence, about ten minutes away). Great school, great faculty, blah, blah, blah. BUT THE SCHOOL IS NOT ABA ACCREDITED! IT'S ACCREDITED BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, BUT NOT ACCREDITED BY THE ABA!

The ABA went to LaVerne last October for an Accreditation review and assessment, but the school has not received any word from the ABA. As of this date, still no ABA provisional accreditation.

My question to everyone is: Should I gut it out? Should I make the one hour commute to Los Angeles, working during the day, going to Loyola or Southwestern at night? Or should I go to a LaVerne, which is a non-ABA, but State Bar-accredited Law school?

I could transfer later from an non-ABA school to an ABA school, but that's a crapshoot. I won't be guaranteed a spot in an ABA school as a transfer.

Any advice would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks,
Crusader

8
Hi everyone...

I am have some location decision issues and I would welcome everyone's candid and courteous opinion and/or advice.

If u don't know my background: URM, Non-Trad., Married, work full-time (exp. 15 years).

My dilemma is this:

My schools of choice are Southwestern and Loyola Law School. Both are in the Downtown L.A. area. Unfortunately, I live in Ontario, California (Inland Empire), which is about 45 miles east from Los Angeles, CA. Travel time to Los Angeles is about an hour in the morning and about two hours in the evenings due to traffic. :( I currently work in the San Bernardino, CA area, but getting a transfer to work in the Downtown L.A. may not be difficult. Unfortunately, I cannot get a house in the L.A. area due to the high prices of houses and condo's (median for a house in the L.A. area: $375K, condo: $300K).

There is a bright spot though. I live in the area near LaVerne School of Law (in my city of residence, about ten minutes away). Great school, great faculty, blah, blah, blah. BUT THE SCHOOL IS NOT ABA ACCREDITED! IT'S ACCREDITED BY THE CALIFORNIA STATE BAR, BUT NOT ACCREDITED BY THE ABA!

The ABA went to LaVerne last October for an Accreditation review and assessment, but the school has not received any word from the ABA. As of this date, still no ABA provisional accreditation.

My question to everyone is: Should I gut it out? Should I make the one hour commute to Los Angeles, working during the day, going to Loyola or Southwestern at night? Or should I go to a LaVerne, which is a non-ABA, but State Bar-accredited Law school?

I could transfer later from an non-ABA school to an ABA school, but that's a crapshoot. I won't be guaranteed a spot in an ABA school as a transfer.

Any advice would greatly be appreciated.

Thanks,
Crusader

9
Law School Applications / Re: "personal experience"
« on: February 25, 2004, 07:01:54 PM »
"Affirmative Action just allows for preferential treatment for minorities, which is expected to counteract that discrimination which cannot be proven."

What do you mean discrimination cannot be proven?  Please explain.  Are you trying to say that gays, women and people are not discriminated just because this is not documented and therefore cannot be proven?  Are you saying this based on experience?  If you are, then just because you don't see discrimination against minorities in your world doesn't mean that discrimination doesn't exist.  There are a tremendous amount lawsuits adjudicated and pending in our civil court systems because of discrimination against minorities.  I'm a paralegal assistant, thus I research a tremendous amount of civil cases, so I do see them.

In my opinion:  Affirmative action doesn't allow for preferential treatment for minorities.  Unfortunately, there are individuals out there that truly believe that there was no Affirmative Action before this...also that the sins of the past had no impact on today's society.  It's almost like the past did not exist and that since it's 2004, it's a clean sheet and everyone is on a even slate based on individualism.  KSU, that is simply not reality.  What is wrong with giving a person a chance, IF that person is well qualified?  If the colleges or employers, or loan officers, have had a history of giving plenty of opportunities and resources to member of the majority class, why is so wrong to give a member of the minority class a chance if he's well qualified?

I did not say that the government is  responsible for solving every problem faced by Americans.  However, it is the responsibility of the Government to protect it's citizens against racism, domestic terrorism and discrimination.  The solution that I was requesting wasn't a government solution, but a social and moral solution.

As to your solution about sending money to the inner cities would strengthen the opportunities: Wouldn't this type of welfare strengthen the stereotype that all minorities want a hand out?  A educational grant to an inner city is the same as a scholarship to an individual student, so why bother?

I also believe that the breeding resentment and hypersensitivity to racial issues is not just based solely on the Affirmative Action.  It is based on a lack of empathy, a lack of knowledge and understanding of the past, and tremendous amount of fingerpointing by both sides, which has failed to provide a common solution.

I give you this much credit..at least you gave a solution to the problem.  Most of the time there is a tremendous amount of rhetoric, but no solutions are ever given.  I would respect the opinions of those who are vehemently opposed to Affirmative action if they only gave a sound solution.

 

10
Law School Applications / Re: "personal experience"
« on: February 25, 2004, 04:46:11 PM »
I've been monitoring this thread for a little while now.  And unfortunately the arguments in the thread have resulted in ad hominem attacks against one another.  Which is unfortunate because I have yet to see a solution from both sides.  Is there any common ground on this issue?

I come from a bi-racial background (white and black) and I can see both sides standing their ground for what they believe is to be right.  However, I don't see any solutions.  Let's just say in your perfect world, there is no Affirmative Action...How do you protect the minorities against being discriminated against?  How do you insure that their civil rights are protected?  [i]And please people..NO SPIN!!!!!!  In other words, please do not respond by saying "I don't give a damn......All I care about is that Affirmative Action is right/wrong because I got screwed!!!" or "Well, I don't care about that because it's whites/blacks that only get screwed."  [/i]
 
In case you haven't noticed, with the demographics changing to a majority hispanic population in the West and Southwest United States, how are whites going to protect their Civil Rights?  I'm not saying that all Hispanics will discriminate against other minorities and Whites but, how do you protect people from being discriminated against once the big, bad Affirmative Action is gone?  And when the Minority population becomes the Majority population, then will you feel so smug about how Affirmative Action is so bad?

And on a side note:

I am really amused when certain people play the race card stereotype as well as the victim card stereotype when it comes to minorities.  Unfortunately, everyone plays the "victim" game, including whites.  Stop the blame game.  Too often this country's racial debate is sidetracked by a search for a scapegoat.  And more often than not, those scapegoats end up being the people on the other side of the debate. "It's your fault because you're a racist." "No, It's your fault because you expect something for nothing." "It's white-skin privilege." "It's reverse racism." And on and on it goes.   .

I truly believe that it doesn't matter who is responsible for things being screwed up;  the only relevant question is, "How do we make things better?".

What is the solution?  For the minorities - What are the alternatives?

I believe that's what a diverse background is all about:  I doesn't matter what race I'm from.  What's important is the obstacles and barriers I overcame to be the person that I am.  I'm not trying to play a damn victim card!!!   I'm just trying to show I have some damn character for overcoming those obstacles.  You can be white, black, green, brown or whatever.  Just because affirmative action will get you in, affirmative action doesn't help you to get the job done, get assignments completed or study for exams.

I believe that until a solution on how to protect minorities from being discriminated against, affirmative action is here for the time being like it or not. 

Good luck to everyone in their future endeavors,

Crusader



Pages: [1] 2