Am I Crazy to Be Considering Law School? Forum

[francisurquhart]

Here's the basic situation:

I'm thirty. I'm Canadian. I have a job for a major corporation that pays well. Combined with outside income (I'm also an author), I'm on track to make six figures in either 2014 or, at the latest, 2015. I live in Vancouver where I own a recently-purchased home with not a lot of equity in it.

I had an LSAT score from a couple of years ago (2011) at 163. I went in and wrote the test, more or less, cold (I'd bought one LSAT prep book and done a few practice tests at some point prior to that). I went back to finish my BA (I needed three classes) this year, so I figured - "what the Hell" and I bought an LSAC account and applied to a few places that gave me fee waivers.

Then I got the call from Kansas - they'd let me in with a 100% tuition scholarship (but with a 3.0 stipulation to maintain).

Now I've also gotten a letter from Willamette (and a call) - 100% tuition scholarship without any stipulations.

So, here's the basic trade-off. If I stay where I am (and perhaps go to school locally), in three years I can probably have roughly $150,000 in assets, an MBA, and an income in the $100,000 range... But, in many ways a job that doesn't go to the core of what I really want to do (ultimately, more than anything else, I want to run for office, preferably in the United States). There's a pretty good chance that, if I stay doing what I am, I'll probably own two homes by 2016.

Alternatively, in three years I can have debts in the $40,000(ish) range, no guaranteed job, but have a JD (and soon thereafter become a lawyer).

Almost everyone tells me that I'm crazy to forego the first for the second, especially since the chances of my going the BigLaw route (because of a mix of age, nationality, and personality, are essentially zero). Frankly, I'd be most likely to attempt to support myself with book royalties while working as an ideologically-motivated sole practitioner.

Economically, I think... Well, it's obvious which path is more lucrative in the short-term. But would I be nuts to turn down multiple full-rides (I've also applied elsewhere) now, given that I probably won't have another chance to do it? I'm not sure how I feel about being a lawyer in half a decade versus a middle manager with perhaps, at the outside, half a million dollars in assets.

[thesealocust]

As long as your career goal is unemployment, depression, self-loathing and crippling non-dischargable debt[FN1], then going to law school would be a great choice.

[FN1] Even on a 100% tuition scholarship, you'll be not-working and taking on loans for living expenses in all likelihood.

To put a finer point on it: the schools offering you scholarships are steaming piles of crap who couldn't reliably get their graduates jobs in a chain gang if their lives depended on it. The legal industry is in complete shambles and you would be an idiot to wade into the shitstorm given (a) everything else you have going for you and (b) your mediocre credentials relative to the law school admissions rat race.

Keep doing research, but be sure to check this: http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/

You have been warned.

Welcome to TLS.

[Doorkeeper]

None of the law schools you can get into with 163 would be worth deviating from your current career path.

Also, why not run of office in Canada?

[WanderingPondering]

None of the law schools you can get into with 163 would be worth deviating from your current career path.

Also, why not run of office in Canada?

In Canada, everyone who wants a spot in politics gets one due to the fact that almost no one lives there. Maybe he is looking for a challenge.

[francisurquhart]

None of the law schools you can get into with 163 would be worth deviating from your current career path.

Also, why not run of office in Canada?

That's kind of my feeling... I should have done it when I was twenty-four.

As for why I wouldn't run in Canada... Well, it's complicated. To simplify it - being an extraordinarily pro-American Canadian in a public way probably wouldn't sell well among the Canadian electorate.

[francisurquhart]

As long as your career goal is unemployment, depression, self-loathing and crippling non-dischargable debt[FN1], then going to law school would be a great choice.

[FN1] Even on a 100% tuition scholarship, you'll be not-working and taking on loans for living expenses in all likelihood.

To put a finer point on it: the schools offering you scholarships are steaming piles of crap who couldn't reliably get their graduates jobs in a chain gang if their lives depended on it. The legal industry is in complete shambles and you would be an idiot to wade into the shitstorm given (a) everything else you have going for you and (b) your mediocre credentials relative to the law school admissions rat race.

Keep doing research, but be sure to check this: http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/

You have been warned.

Welcome to TLS.

Yes, I'd probably take some loans. I'd have continuing outside income I'd be able to maintain in the $15,000-$25,000 range, I think, plus perhaps $20,000-$30,000 in savings... But I'm also a spender and I imagine that I'd continue spending.

Looking at the numbers so far, I think I could probably get into some better schools or at least alternatives.

I'm considering Gonzaga's two year-accelerated program. A side note being that I'd probably stay somewhere in the Pacific Northwest (British Columbia-Washington-Oregon) as my primary residence.

[midnight_circus]

Is running for U.S. political office the only reason to be a lawyer? If so, yes, you're crazy. Don't do it. We're more than happy to elect businessmen. Get that MBA, do some serious work, get involved with philanthropy and politics, sell your soul, and you're golden.

[francisurquhart]

Is running for U.S. political office the only reason to be a lawyer? If so, yes, you're crazy. Don't do it. We're more than happy to elect businessmen. Get that MBA, do some serious work, get involved with philanthropy and politics, sell your soul, and you're golden.

Well, that and I feel that I would be, if I was able to get into any sort of litigation, a more effective than average lawyer because, as an opponent in any kind of contest, I'm a tough fighter and kind of an asshole.

I don't have any particular reverence for the law itself, but I do feel that my ideal profession would be one where one could go about seeking enemies to fight and destroy. I realize that isn't what the mainstream practice of law entails, but it's certainly something that I can entail under some circumstances.

[thesealocust]

I'm considering Gonzaga's two year-accelerated program.

Gonzaga is also an abysmal law school that produces almost nothing but failure and despair.

This is an unquestionably bad idea.

Well, that and I feel that I would be, if I was able to get into any sort of litigation, a more effective than average lawyer because, as an opponent in any kind of contest, I'm a tough fighter and kind of an asshole.

Hmm.

You may in fact deserve this fate.

[Doorkeeper]

None of the law schools you can get into with 163 would be worth deviating from your current career path.

Also, why not run of office in Canada?

That's kind of my feeling... I should have done it when I was twenty-four.
As for why I wouldn't run in Canada... Well, it's complicated. To simplify it - being an extraordinarily pro-American Canadian in a public way probably wouldn't sell well among the Canadian electorate.

Run in a Conservative area that still has a hard on for Stephen Harper. Maybe not Vancouver.

[eerie_erie]

Is there a reason why you are considering a change in career/lifestyle? Maybe I would take some time to think about what you really want and if you could get close to what you want without such a drastic shift. That's all. I don't think I'm comfortable with giving advice past this.

[Hutz_and_Goodman]

It sounds like you shouldn't switch unless you're positive you want to be a lawyer.

If you get a full ride , big law 1L SA and 2L SA you're still looking at around $40k to get the degree for cost of living plus your forgone income. But if you get big law you'll start at $160k. On the other hand you'll be working 65-70 hrs a week.

[Ti Malice]

Go for it, man. Live your dream.

[midnight_circus]

Is running for U.S. political office the only reason to be a lawyer? If so, yes, you're crazy. Don't do it. We're more than happy to elect businessmen. Get that MBA, do some serious work, get involved with philanthropy and politics, sell your soul, and you're golden.

Well, that and I feel that I would be, if I was able to get into any sort of litigation, a more effective than average lawyer because, as an opponent in any kind of contest, I'm a tough fighter and kind of an asshole.

I don't have any particular reverence for the law itself, but I do feel that my ideal profession would be one where one could go about seeking enemies to fight and destroy. I realize that isn't what the mainstream practice of law entails, but it's certainly something that I can entail under some circumstances.

You sound perfectly awful. I'm sure you'll do excellently in politics. Don't worry, there's plenty of competition to be slaughtered in the business world. Stick with that. More money, more influence, more opportunities, and so much more of that electorate-swaying prestige than Gonzaga Law.

[twenty]

I sort of liked you up to the point where you started telling people you'd be an excellent lawyer due to your antagonistic assholery. But okay, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're more arrogant than anything else, real advice: do not go to law school in the US, do not run for office in the US. Having a law degree is neither necessary, sufficient, or frankly even beneficial for politics in the United States in this day and age.

A lot of our politicians are former attorneys because being an attorney used to be a sure-fire way to making bucketloads of money. This money was then used to fund a small campaign, and pretty soon they were off to the races. That is definitely no longer the case.

If you're making a six figure salary and you're thinking about getting your MBA, do that. Then run for politics in the United States if you really want to. Don't go to law school.

[Teoeo]

Is running for U.S. political office the only reason to be a lawyer? If so, yes, you're crazy. Don't do it. We're more than happy to elect businessmen. Get that MBA, do some serious work, get involved with philanthropy and politics, sell your soul, and you're golden.

Well, that and I feel that I would be, if I was able to get into any sort of litigation, a more effective than average lawyer because, as an opponent in any kind of contest, I'm a tough fighter and kind of an asshole.

I don't have any particular reverence for the law itself, but I do feel that my ideal profession would be one where one could go about seeking enemies to fight and destroy. I realize that isn't what the mainstream practice of law entails, but it's certainly something that I can entail under some circumstances.

Envisioning you going to law school and being a "more effective than average lawyer" because of you are a "tough fighter" greatly amuses me. Go to law school in Kansas. You are clearly much smarter than the vast majority of your peers, so you will have no trouble maintaining a 3.0 GPA.

[xRON MEXiCOx]

No one is going to vote for some canadian who has lived their entire life in Canada

[bjsesq]

This is a post in a thread.

[phillywc]

No one is going to vote for some canadian who has lived their entire life in Canada

[Mal Reynolds]

Is running for U.S. political office the only reason to be a lawyer? If so, yes, you're crazy. Don't do it. We're more than happy to elect businessmen. Get that MBA, do some serious work, get involved with philanthropy and politics, sell your soul, and you're golden.

Well, that and I feel that I would be, if I was able to get into any sort of litigation, a more effective than average lawyer because, as an opponent in any kind of contest, I'm a tough fighter and kind of an asshole.

I don't have any particular reverence for the law itself, but I do feel that my ideal profession would be one where one could go about seeking enemies to fight and destroy. I realize that isn't what the mainstream practice of law entails, but it's certainly something that I can entail under some circumstances.

How are you thirty and this clueless? Also what do you mean by asshole? Does that mean you only hold the door open for the first three people instead of five to six like most Canadians?

[twenty]

Does that mean you only hold the door open for the first three people instead of five to six like most Canadians?

[20141023]

.

[elterrible78]

lol Mal...

OP, on a more serious note, I've heard that you can get your foot in the door of America's political arena by bodybuilding or wrestling instead of going to law school, so you might want to consider these options as well.

I can only imagine the 'roid rage that would result from this "tough fighter" looking to seek and destroy opponents once he's on the juice.

[phillywc]

How are you thirty and this clueless? Also what do you mean by asshole? Does that mean you only hold the door open for the first three people instead of five to six like most Canadians?

Damn. Well done.

[bombaysippin]

No one else thinks this is a flame...?