Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: What's good about being an attorney?  (Read 46931 times)

mantoytano

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: What's good about being an attorney?
« Reply #80 on: December 25, 2006, 05:03:23 AM »
 

"First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
             -- Shakespeare, King Henry VI, Part II, IV, ii



I may be wrong, but is it not that this is quoted out of context?

lawporn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Alice ponders what the world is like on the other side of a mirror, and to her surprise, is able to pass through to experience the alternate world. She discovers a book with looking-glass poetry, "Jabberwocky", which she can read only by holding it up to a mirror. Upon leaving the house, she enters a garden, where the flowers speak to her and mistake her for a flower. There, Alice also meets the Red Queen, who offers a throne to Alice if she just moves to the eighth rank in a chess match. Alice is placed as the White Queen's pawn, and begins the game by taking a train to the fourth rank, since pawns in chess can move two spaces on the first move.

Red King snoring, by John TennielShe then meets Tweedledum and Tweedledee, of whom she knows from the famous nursery rhyme. After reciting to her the long poem "The Walrus and the Carpenter", the two proceed to act out the events of their own poem. Alice continues on to meet the White Queen, who is very absent-minded and later transforms into a sheep.

The following chapter details her meeting with Humpty Dumpty, who explains to her the meaning of "Jabberwocky", before his inevitable fall from the wall. This is followed by an encounter with the Lion and the Unicorn, who again proceed to act out a nursery rhyme. She is then rescued from the Red Knight by the White Knight, who many consider to be a representation of Lewis Carroll himself.

At this point, she reaches the eight rank and becomes a queen, and by capturing the Red Queen, puts the Red King (who has remained stationary throughout the book) into checkmate. She then awakes from her dream (if it was a dream), and blames her black kitten (the white kitten was wholly innocent) for the mischief caused by the story. The two kittens are the children of Dinah, Alice's cat in the first book.

lauschool

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
"It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards," as the White Queen says to Alice in "Through the Looking-Glass" was Jung's favourite quotes on Synchronicity. 

my stepson my lover

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: What's good about being an attorney?
« Reply #83 on: May 31, 2007, 06:49:12 AM »
The modern lawyer is haunted not by guilt but by anxiety. He seeks not to inflict his own certainties on others but to find a meaning in life. Liberated from the superstitions of the past, he doubts even the reality of his own existence ... His sexual attitudes are permissive rather than puritanical, even though his emancipation from ancient taboos brings him no sexual peace.

Fiercely competitive in his demand for approval and acclaim, he distrusts competition because he associates it unconsciously with an unbridled urge to destroy ... He (harbours) deeply antisocial impulses. He praises respect for rules and regulations in the secret belief that they do not apply to himself. Acquisitive in the sense that his cravings have no limits, he ... demands immediate gratification and lives in a state of restless, perpetually unsatisfied desire.

The lawyers' pronounced lack of empathy, off-handed exploitativeness, grandiose fantasies and uncompromising sense of entitlement make him treat all people as though they were objects (he "objectifies" people). He regards others as either useful conduits for and sources of narcissistic supply (attention, adulation, etc.) -- or as extensions of himself. Similarly, serial killers often mutilate their victims and abscond with trophies -- usually, body parts. Some of them have been known to eat the organs they have ripped -- an act of merging with the dead and assimilating them through digestion. They treat their victims as some children do their rag dolls.

Killing the victim -- often capturing him or her on film before the murder -- is a form of exerting unmitigated, absolute, and irreversible control over it. The serial killer aspires to "freeze time" in the still perfection that he has choreographed. The victim is motionless and defenseless. The killer attains long sought "object permanence". The victim is unlikely to run on the serial assassin, or vanish as earlier objects in the killer's life (e.g., his parents) have done.


Very interesting!

christy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: What's good about being an attorney?
« Reply #84 on: June 03, 2007, 02:50:56 AM »

Nothing is good or bad about being an attorney. Who you are determines your level of happiness in whatever you do.


That's exactly the point, Gwiz! Lawyers/lawyer-wannabes are very unhappy people.

employmentlaw

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile

"It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards," as the White Queen says to Alice in "Through the Looking-Glass" was Jung's favourite quotes on Synchronicity. 
 

Could you expand a little bit please?

papabear

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: What's good about being an attorney?
« Reply #86 on: June 25, 2007, 04:28:14 AM »
Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events which occur in a meaningful manner, but which are causally inexplicable to the person or persons experiencing them. The events would also have to suggest some underlying pattern in order to satisfy the definition of synchronicity as originally developed by Jung who coined the word to describe what he called "temporally coincident occurrences of acausal events." Jung variously described synchronicity as an "acausal connecting principle" (i.e. a pattern of connection that cannot be explained by direct causality), "meaningful coincidence" and "acausal parallelism".

It differs from mere coincidence in that synchronicity implies not just a happenstance, but an underlying pattern or dynamic expressed through meaningful relationships or events. Jung believed that many experiences perceived as coincidence were due not merely to chance, but instead, suggested the manifestation of parallel events or circumstances reflecting this governing dynamic.

Wheres the Money, Noreen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Sharks, Rays and Bottom Feeders
« Reply #87 on: June 30, 2007, 05:21:52 AM »
When looking at how attorneys generally deal with third parties, you should divide them into Sharks, Rays and Bottom Feeders. Sharks are those attorneys that deal aggressively in most every circumstance, although not necessarily in an unpleasant fashion. Sharks are always on the prowl seeking to gain advantage in accordance with the law. While they operate within the bounds of the law, what they do is not always seen as fair. Rays are those attorneys that can be aggressive or docile depending on the circumstances. You are never quite sure whether the Ray is going to be aggressive or not. You have to be careful about unsuspectingly stepping on a Ray, thereby exciting them to the point where they want to sting you. They generally operate within the law and with a greater sense of fairness than their counterparts. Bottom Feeders are usually docile, but can be nasty little pains when they want to be. They are constantly moving in and out of shadows so you're never quite sure where they stand in any given situation. Bottom Feeders are self-centered creatures and would do just about anything to gain their next meal. Fairness is not a consideration and operating within the law is often an afterthought. You must always beware the Bottom Feeder, for you never know where it has been, whom it has been eating with and what it wants from you.

While Sharks might seem the most dangerous of the bunch, they generally are not for those accustomed to handling them. When you recognize the Shark fin sticking up, you always know where you stand. You understand that you will continually be circled and sized up for a possible attack, but ultimately you know it is coming so you are always prepared. You know your strengths and weaknesses beforehand as well as those of your opponent. However, many attorneys hate dealing with Sharks because they feel threatened by them and are afraid they may be eaten alive in the process. You don't generally find Sharks in legal matters that don't have some form of opponent or adverse third party. You tend to find them in litigation, contract negotiations, business purchases, sales, mergers, spin-offs & other business dealings, financial lending, debt negotiation & bankruptcy, employment & labor issues as well as a whole host of other types of legal matters involving adversely interested parties. They love a good fight. Sharks are generally always Sharks. They find it extremely difficult to become Rays, but can sometimes turn into Bottom Feeders.

Rays on the other hand are somewhat trickier to deal with than Sharks. Rays can be easy to get along with and extremely docile and friendly. At times they can also be extremely dangerous and aggressive. Therein lies the problem. Being aggressive with a Ray that wants to be friendly may get you nowhere or even worse, stung badly because you didn't play according to its rules. On the other hand, being friendly and unsuspectingly stepping on an aggressive Ray can also lead to undesirable results. Some Rays are docile, friendly and easy to deal with. Others are aggressive, but at times extremely friendly. The difficulty is that you are always trying to find the fine line between the dark side and the good side of this force known as the Ray.

Bottom Feeders, I believe, are the most dangerous of the bunch. While they can be both aggressive and docile, there always seems to be a hidden agenda driving them forward. This agenda can be so overpowering that they lose all reason and bite when they should be friendly or attempt to seek your favor when they should be tearing you to pieces. The Bottom Feeder's agenda is usually dark, unseemly and sometimes even illegal. It can be driven by greed, the desire for power, money or position, ego, ill will, lust or just be mean spirited. Part of the problem is you just don't know what the agenda is for sure. Never turn your back on this creature, because they will sell you down the river the first chance they get. Usually when a better meal comes along.

vaplaugh

  • Guest
Re: Sharks, Rays and Bottom Feeders
« Reply #88 on: June 30, 2007, 06:31:46 PM »
When looking at how attorneys generally deal with third parties, you should divide them into Sharks, Rays and Bottom Feeders. Sharks are those attorneys that deal aggressively in most every circumstance, although not necessarily in an unpleasant fashion. Sharks are always on the prowl seeking to gain advantage in accordance with the law. While they operate within the bounds of the law, what they do is not always seen as fair. Rays are those attorneys that can be aggressive or docile depending on the circumstances. You are never quite sure whether the Ray is going to be aggressive or not. You have to be careful about unsuspectingly stepping on a Ray, thereby exciting them to the point where they want to sting you. They generally operate within the law and with a greater sense of fairness than their counterparts. Bottom Feeders are usually docile, but can be nasty little pains when they want to be. They are constantly moving in and out of shadows so you're never quite sure where they stand in any given situation. Bottom Feeders are self-centered creatures and would do just about anything to gain their next meal. Fairness is not a consideration and operating within the law is often an afterthought. You must always beware the Bottom Feeder, for you never know where it has been, whom it has been eating with and what it wants from you.

While Sharks might seem the most dangerous of the bunch, they generally are not for those accustomed to handling them. When you recognize the Shark fin sticking up, you always know where you stand. You understand that you will continually be circled and sized up for a possible attack, but ultimately you know it is coming so you are always prepared. You know your strengths and weaknesses beforehand as well as those of your opponent. However, many attorneys hate dealing with Sharks because they feel threatened by them and are afraid they may be eaten alive in the process. You don't generally find Sharks in legal matters that don't have some form of opponent or adverse third party. You tend to find them in litigation, contract negotiations, business purchases, sales, mergers, spin-offs & other business dealings, financial lending, debt negotiation & bankruptcy, employment & labor issues as well as a whole host of other types of legal matters involving adversely interested parties. They love a good fight. Sharks are generally always Sharks. They find it extremely difficult to become Rays, but can sometimes turn into Bottom Feeders.

Rays on the other hand are somewhat trickier to deal with than Sharks. Rays can be easy to get along with and extremely docile and friendly. At times they can also be extremely dangerous and aggressive. Therein lies the problem. Being aggressive with a Ray that wants to be friendly may get you nowhere or even worse, stung badly because you didn't play according to its rules. On the other hand, being friendly and unsuspectingly stepping on an aggressive Ray can also lead to undesirable results. Some Rays are docile, friendly and easy to deal with. Others are aggressive, but at times extremely friendly. The difficulty is that you are always trying to find the fine line between the dark side and the good side of this force known as the Ray.

Bottom Feeders, I believe, are the most dangerous of the bunch. While they can be both aggressive and docile, there always seems to be a hidden agenda driving them forward. This agenda can be so overpowering that they lose all reason and bite when they should be friendly or attempt to seek your favor when they should be tearing you to pieces. The Bottom Feeder's agenda is usually dark, unseemly and sometimes even illegal. It can be driven by greed, the desire for power, money or position, ego, ill will, lust or just be mean spirited. Part of the problem is you just don't know what the agenda is for sure. Never turn your back on this creature, because they will sell you down the river the first chance they get. Usually when a better meal comes along.

1) Wow. You know how to copy/paste. http://www.legal-advice-services.com/Page%203.html
2) And this is a dumb description, anyway.

BKA

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: The more things change the more they are the same
« Reply #89 on: July 03, 2007, 10:22:40 PM »

Ed Gein claimed that by eating the corpses of women who looked like his deceased mother, he could preserve his mother's soul inside his body. He killed two women who bore passing resemblances to his mother, eating one and being apprehended while in the process of preparing the second woman's body for consumption. He also used the flesh of exhumed corpses to fashion a "woman suit" for himself so that he could "become" his mother, and carried on conversations with himself in a falsetto voice. After his arrest he was placed in a mental facility for the remainder of his life.


Another stupid murderer was Lowell "Ed" Amos, a former Detroit business man whose mother and 3 wives died under suspicious circumstances. He was convicted in 1996 of murdering his third wife, Roberta "Bobbie" Mowery Amos (there's a 2006 Lifetime Network made-for-TV movie called "Black Widower.") Lowell was a former General Motors plant manager, and came from Anderson, Indiana. In December of 1994, Lowell and wife Roberta attended a company executive party at the Atheneum Hotel in Detroit. The Amos's went to their suite at 4:30am. At 8:30am, Lowell called Norbert Crabtree, another executive from the party, and seemed to be in a panic. Crabtree and another hotel guest named Daniel Porcasi went to the room, and Lowell told them that Roberta had died in an accident. Lowell said he needed to cleanup before calling police, and he asked Crabtree to take a leather case for him, which he did. Crabtree looked inside, and found a sports coat, a syringe without a needle, and a foul-smelling washcloth inside. Amos later reclaimed the bag, and its contents disappeared.

Amos told police that he and Roberta had engaged in sexual acts involving cocaine, and claimed she was still taking the cocaine when he fell asleep. He told police that she could not snort the drug due to a sinus problem, and that instead she took it "inside" her body (in her female private part) He said that when he woke up she was dead. Bobby's body contained over 15 times the lethal dose of the drug. Autopsy revealed that there was cocaine inside Roberta's vagina, but none externally. Prosecution said that he first gave her a glass of wine with two crushed Xanax in it, then when she was passed-out, he injected her vagina with the cocaine (dissolved in water), and then smothered her with the pillow when she began to convulse. On October 24th, 1996, Lowell was convicted of premeditated murder and murder using a toxic substance, both considered separate charges of first-degree murder.