So You Wanna Go to Law School? (1/2) 

You've saved yourself $$$.

Law school is a huge investment that will influence your life until your death. Why wouldn't people worry?

M It's boring for you! For those who are not bored, law school is the only right choice for them

And it's depressing when many cannot find well-paying attorney positions after getting a J.D. and passing the bar exam.

For someone who’s genuinely just interested in studying the law, rather than practicing it, would you give any specific advice?

gideondavid30 I’m in the same boat except that my undergrad degree was in philosophy. I’m not so optimistic about scholarships though....

Nick McLaughlin Get a high LSAT score (160 +). THAT will guarantee you a spot in law school and give you a scholarship for the first semester. It Should cover books and tuition. Once in law school,. You will have to compete for you grades. IN ORDER to maintain the scholarship,. You have to be in the top 30-40 percent.

@@andersondalmeus1406 lmao! You should do standup!

great analysis !

bob saget I don’t have a law degree, nope, not yet! I am 30 credits away from a bachelors in business and then law school. This is the link to my reference priceonomics.com/how-to-be-a-lawyer-without-going-to-law-school/

me myself stating that you are going is nothing. I can say I will be an astronaut yet I am not in NASA. First finish your 30 credits then you can predict that you are going to law school.

me myself You make no sense. What do you mean you can go to law school without the debt? “Apprentice” under a judge is not law school. You have no JD, can’t take the bar exam, and can’t practice law as a lawyer. Not to mention you haven’t even graduated from undergraduate. You also plan on going to law school in the future, which completely contradicted your original comment.

The apprenticeship takes about 4-8 years. In which you do not have a JD, even though you may be able to practice law, your apprenticeship won't translate into any other field of work.

You can sit for the bar without going to law school in some states.

If you do give a fuck about human issues you’re probably not cut out for Doctorate level degrees. Gotta be a selfish, competitive, and motivated bastard

gideondavid30 There isn’t much you can do with a law degree.

J.G Wells So if I plan on making 50K a year; I am willing to work for free to get my foot in the door. You are telling me that the degree is worthless? The only thing I understand is that going into debt to get the degree is dumb.

gideondavid30 I didn’t suggest it was useless, I’m studying for law atm. But outside of law, the degree isn’t that stretchable.

gideondavid30 The thing is there are few like you.

J.G Wells True. THEN again, my local university offers a joint Master's degree in law/social work.

Costa I definitely agree with this. The second guy was so annoying speaking. #HorribleSpeaking 🙁

Costa it started out pretty bad. But I think it absolutely improved once they gained a little confidence

I respect NYU so much and I genuinely want to attend, but I completely agree with you! I was irritated a couple of minutes into watching the panel by the overuse of filler words and sounds. But I think it improved towards the end. It could have been a feeling of nervousness or a lack of preparation. But I do agree.

Imagine if you were up there, let him be, don’t be so arrogant.

i agree..only the third guy was well spoken. the middle guy, so much Ughm i couldnt focus on anything he said.

ОРМУС КАИЗЕР The only incite you gained from that hour long discussion about law education is that the panel we’re wearing colorful socks and brown shoes. Nice to know where your priorities lie.

Lmfao well they all are in law school and successful so.

Who cares about the socks, more interested in the topics about law school.

So you really think where we were born matters. LOL you are lucky to be born anywhere esp america. Don't feel entitled to certain jobs, anyone born anywhere is capable of any job.

look at other state's "tough on crime" policies and show me that they are successful. Tough on crime has never been a functioning way to deter crime and it only ends up costing taxpayers more $$. I'm not saying I know the magic answer to deterring crime, but history has shown us that our current incarceration policies have done absolutely nothing to stop people from committing crime. The only real outcomes have been the perpetual disenfranchisement of minorities coupled with sharp increases in the value of street drugs. This has all indirectly formulated powerful gangs and cartel's allowing them to accumulate massive resources while capitalizing on the stupidity of the United States policies on crime. I know your question is likely more angled towards violent crime although it has been shown that increasing prison sentences has no effect on deterring crime. It only makes things worse.

@@pmcdugald Yes my comment was to address violent crime. However, you mentioned that "increasing prison sentences has no effect on deterring crime." How can you prove that? How can you prove something that did NOT occur? How can you measure how many people stopped short from committing a particular crime because they knew that the penalty was so severe that it's not worth it? Also, some might argue that ANY prison time doesn't deter crime. So what next...no jails at all?

@@Essays4College You're missing the point here. If you think "tougher on crime" is a solution then you should look at the current data we do have. Increasing rates of incarceration since the 1980's have done nothing to stifle crime incidents and we actually have only seen an increase. We need to reimagine what exactly we are looking to get out of incarceration and also re-examine the word penitence. Current prisons are breeding grounds for future criminals. If you put an 18 Y/O kid in prison for 2 years for felony drug possession he is much more likely to come out of prison resentful of the people who put them there, and full of good criminal contacts and knowledge. Not to mention he won't be allowed to vote, disenfranchising him politically, and he won't be able to get a good job because of laws in most states that make it a requirement to disclose felony status. Let me ask you, do you think all of that is productive for the greater whole of society? It's clear you have not put too much thought into this and the ole' lock em' up and throw away the key strategy is enough for you. No, we should not just close down all the jails and let everyone out. We should really think hard and long about the implications of putting so many people in prison for so long. Black people specifically have had to bore the brunt of this issue and it is undoubtedly causing this extreme resentment and divisiveness we are seeing in our country right now. Remember: every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Putting someone in prison for an indefinite amount of time really does not solve any problem. I believe we should be trying to rehabilitate people and become more cognizant of WHY people are committing crime less so than arguing about how many years they should be locked up for or whether or not they should get the death penalty.

@@pmcdugald What would you say to someone who believes that ANY incarceration at all, regardless of the crime, is inhumane?

@@Essays4College I would say that they are on the right right track but far too extreme. There are obviously instances where prison is justified. I argue that we have become completely detached from anything resembling healthy levels of incarceration and that's clearly a problem that needs to be closely examined. Also, I believe that 100% of non-violent criminals can be rehabilitated and properly re-assimilated into society. What is inhumane is putting someone into life in prison based off an archaic Reagan era "3-strike policy". No non-violent offenders deserve life in prison and I don't think there is legitimate argument to be made against that claim.

Because it matters? What a triggered comment

I think your understanding of the world should be more diverse than your narrow and ridiculous opinions

You're a racist & sexist. The law doesn't need discrimination. Sit this one out.

That’s racist to say