Not to add any fuel to the fire, but...Doug,If you did indeed attend law school, then either it must have been pretty bad, you must have been a poor student, or a combination thereof. You lack the ability to write even cohesive and sensical sentences, let alone arguments. It does not surprise me from what I've seen that you are working for a shady institution like National "Law".Second, you ignore the fact that practicing law is not a RIGHT. It takes much studying and effort to break into the practice of law, and certain skills/abilities are needed. Those who do not possess the basic abilities or motivation to work, are simply not fit to become attorneys. Period. Perhaps law school is a bit too "guarded" financially, however academic "guards" are necessary to ensure that only those who are fit to practice law are allowed to do so (or even learn how to do so).In conclusion, perhaps you should peddle your (relatively) useless wares elsewhere. You won't find much sympathy here.
i think that the schools that account for the upper half of the law student population probably account for more than half of practicing lawyers.
so you honestly believe that the country could use MORE lawyers? or do you really just believe that the average person could use more knowledge about how the legal system works?
Perhaps you should remember that educational pedigree doesn't guarantee what type of attorney you will be.
law isn't a special profession, it just another job/career. The way the system is currently set up, it favors the privileged and grasping over the under-privileged and public interest-oriented. Why should that remain so?
Quote from: red. on July 05, 2006, 08:53:58 AMlaw isn't a special profession, it just another job/career. The way the system is currently set up, it favors the privileged and grasping over the under-privileged and public interest-oriented. Why should that remain so?It shouldn't but your argument has nothing to do with either the OP or the resultant criticism. There needs to be innovative and experimental approaches to broaden the field and looking at the application process is one of many places to start (C&F reform being another obvious one, which I know is something you support). Yet National Law School is merely wrapping itself (poorly) in this rhetoric of breaking barriers to (poorly) mask what is ultimately a scam.Look, there needs to be lobbying reform in DC and there is definitely a political class of well-connected fatcats that feed off the public. Yet when someone dressed in a suit covered with dollar-bills starts advertising on late-night television that you too can receive government grants if you send him $99 for his book, I would hope everyone would recognize that it has nothing to do with real reform. Reform will come from educationalists and social planners who are dedicated to creating viable solutions not hacks like this.
You and I agree except on two points:  I'm not absolutely certain that NLS is a scam, although it certainly looks that way from the manner in which it is presented (I favor, as I have indicated to the OP, transparency over evasive marketing language); and  I think that private sector solutions of this kind can work -- I have much, much less faith than you do in "educationalists and social planners".