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 - Paikea

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28
1
General board for soon-to-be 1Ls / Re: Pre-Law School Reading List.
« on: December 04, 2006, 08:13:04 PM »
My advice would be to read up on law school test taking - specifically IRAC'ing.  Probably one the most important things you can learn to do come test time is know how to IRAC/TREAC etc., effectively.  You will learn how to do this in your research and writing class, but for many, it takes a while to grasp.  For the most part, it is those students who can write a polished IRAC analysis on their final exam that are going to do the best.

If the prof wants an IRAC-style answer, which not all the profs do. I did one practice question using IRAC only to find out there was no way I could get in the word limit using that method because it was just an IR question. The key to exams is being flexible and a)listening to what the professor tells you and b)seeing what the question itself is really asking for.





That's true, there are always going to be professors who want things done to their liking.  But I think for the most part, professors want exams writing in some sort of IRAC form.  Maybe not in second or third year classes, but I cannot imagine a Contracts, Property, Torts etc., final exam where a professor is not going to want or expect some sort of IRAC format.  I think what most incoming 1L's do not realize is that most professors do not have time to read through every exam - rather, they "skim" through them looking to see if you touched on the issues.  As such, this is partially why professors prefer their students to use IRAC'ing or equivalent - makes it easier on them come time to grade the large stack of exam papers, not to mention that it makes your essays have much more clarity. 

2
General board for soon-to-be 1Ls / Re: Pre-Law School Reading List.
« on: December 04, 2006, 01:42:03 AM »
My advice would be to read up on law school test taking - specifically IRAC'ing.  Probably one the most important things you can learn to do come test time is know how to IRAC/TREAC etc., effectively.  You will learn how to do this in your research and writing class, but for many, it takes a while to grasp.  For the most part, it is those students who can write a polished IRAC analysis on their final exam that are going to do the best.

3
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 08, 2006, 07:22:38 PM »
 Whatever you say fly boy.  ;D

4
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 08, 2006, 07:02:52 PM »

ACTUALLY, I think you should watch the play again.  If the ball is IN THE AIR (thus out of the quarterback's hand), any of the players involved in the area that the ball is targeting are in a position to make a play on the ball.  The defensive back was not breaking anywhere (in fact, as a DB, you don't predict the receiver's movements, you react to them, so what you're saying makes no f-ing sense - this is further corroborated by the fact that there was only one receiver near that DB, so it's not like he was making a break on another player).  The arm on Jackson made no difference - it wasn't interfering with the play BEFORE the ball left Hasselbeck's hand, which is all that mattered at that point.  Receivers and DBs jostle - if this occurs before the pass is thrown, this is only an issue if there is clear and deterrent contact.  Once the pass is thrown, TOUCHING THE OPPOSING PLAYER IS MORE THAN LIKELY TO RESULT IN PENALTY.  You make a play on the ball, not on the player.  Even a soft push is enough to disrupt a DB reacting to your movements.  I know that, and so do the refs.  Therefore, IT IS A PENALTY.






LMAO...It must burn inside knowing that a girly girl like myself knows the rules better than you.


Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include:

(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.

(b) Initiating contact with a defender by shoving or pushing off thus creating a separation in an attempt to catch a pass.

Sorry, but Jackson "touching" the DB's forearm is not applicable here. He neither shoved nor pushed off, and separation had already been created.

(c) Driving through a defender who has established a position on the field.


Actions that do not constitute offensive pass interference include:

(a) Incidental contact by a receiverís hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball or neither player is looking for the ball.

(b) Inadvertent touching of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.

(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the ball is clearly uncatchable by involved players.

Note 1: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.



5
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 08, 2006, 05:28:35 PM »

Lame retort.  As I've said in other thread, offensive pass interference (ESPECIALLY in the endzone) merely requires contact in the case of a pushoff.  Any push is enough to give you the half second to get open for that catch, even if it's just a soft one.  There is only ONE call in that situation, and the referee made it. 

And don't buy the crappy, overrated Fox commentary team's version of the Locklear call.  The fact that his man was by him but that he still had his arm around his shoulder clearly indicates a hold.  Even if it's a 50/50 call, I would've made it on the field. 

Also, by definition, if a call is a judgement call, then you can't say it's a bad call.  If you acknowledge it's a judgement call, then the call the referee makes is fair as it is. 

For the record, I'm not a Steelers fan.  I'm just a reasonable fan of the game. 
 



Actually you are wrong.  For offensive interference, or interference in general, the one "interfered" with has to be able to be in position to make a play on the ball.  If you actually watched the play, you would have noticed that the defensive back was already headed to his right and Jackson was breaking to his left.  Jackson did touch him (the defensive back also had his arm on Jackson as well by the way) but there was already clear separation and there was no way the d-back had a play on that pass.  Bad call plain and simple.

As for Locklear?  Again, watch the play.  Did he have his arm hooked?  Possibly.  But the "hook" occured as the d-end was falling to the ground.  As numerous commentators have said, you do not call a hold when the guy is falling down and about 5 yard away from the QB.  Again, bad call.

Again, this does not mean that the Steelers would have still not won.  But the mere fact that even in today's news they are still talking about the officiating, imho, takes credence away from victory.  And that is a shame. 

Oh, and by the way, every call is a judgment call.  And, absolutely, there are bad judgment calls.  Don't fool yourself by thinking otherwise.

6
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 08, 2006, 12:41:12 AM »
I wouldn't.  They won.  It doesn't matter if anyone thinks they didn't deserve to win--they did.  I don't think they care if the refs made bad calls or not, and if I were a steeler's fan, neither would I.





I'm sure there are many Steeler fans who are just glad they won.  That is fine.  Most of my friends were Steeler fans and while they are happy their team won, they also feel slighted that because of the bad officiating, their "victory" has been put in question.  As my friend told me "A Steelers team trailing 21-14 is a much different team than one leading 21-10."  I am not quite sure what he means by this...he is much more of a football expert and Steeler expert than I am. 

My only point is that the horrid officiated took away from the Steelers win.  And that is sad. 

 

7
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 08, 2006, 12:28:33 AM »
It's funny because if the officials had not blown those calls, Seattle would have been leading 21-14 in the fourth.  Would they have hung on to win?  Who knows.  But if the Steelers would have been able to come back and win, it would have spoke much louder about their championship.

As it stands now, their victory kind of has the aura of when Apollo Creed defeated Rocky.  Yes the Steelers won, but for many Seahawk and Steeler fans, they didn't really win.

And that is the real tragedy.





They didn't blow those calls.  Do your research.







Sorry, but the call on Jackson was blown, as was Locklear.  Judgment calls yes, but bad ones at that.

I'm sure you will be stuck on your ways though.  That's fine.  But regardless of whether Seattle would have or should have won, the truth of the matter is that the Steelers victory has a big question mark stamped on it because these calls.  And that is truly sad.  If I were a Steelers fan, I would be ticked off.

8
General Off-Topic Board / Re: congratulations to the steelers
« on: February 07, 2006, 11:43:53 PM »
It's funny because if the officials had not blown those calls, Seattle would have been leading 21-14 in the fourth.  Would they have hung on to win?  Who knows.  But if the Steelers would have been able to come back and win, it would have spoke much louder about their championship.

As it stands now, their victory kind of has the aura of when Apollo Creed defeated Rocky.  Yes the Steelers won, but for many Seahawk and Steeler fans, they didn't really win.

And that is the real tragedy.

9
News Discussion / Re: Moderates v. Liberals
« on: February 01, 2006, 02:21:36 AM »
Tax Reform
Social Security Reform
Democratization of the Middle East
No Child Left Behind
Medicare Reform
Health Savings Accounts
Tax Cuts

Did you even watch the State of the Union tonight?

Tax reform - Making tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of americans permament.  And who are these wealthy 1%?  I'll let you figure that out.
Democratization of the Middle East - Vested interest in contolling oil and giving out no-bid contracts to US contractors.
No Child Left Behind - Public Schools that do not pass muster get their federal funding cut off.  This money is then redirected to the voucher program.
Health Savings Accounts - AKA privatizing health care.
Tax Cuts - see tax reform.

Like I said - big business and fundamental christianity.

10
News Discussion / Re: Moderates v. Liberals
« on: February 01, 2006, 02:02:32 AM »
The fact is that the neocon agenda goes to promote the well being of 1) Big business and/or 2)fundamental christianity.  That's it.  End of story
ROFL :D




Name me any issue the current administation has championed since it took office.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 28