canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.
One day I will be cool like you and have almost 15k posts. Oh wait, no. I won't.Tom Joad wrote:OP's post history is gold.
Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.
I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.
You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.Ben Franklin wrote:Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.
Want to continue reading?
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.Bildungsroman wrote:You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.Ben Franklin wrote:Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.
I do not think that means what you think it means.Ben Franklin wrote:I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.
The Ben Franklin username and picture was too obvious bro. Better luck next Troll.Ben Franklin wrote:I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.Bildungsroman wrote:You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.Ben Franklin wrote:Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.
Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.Ben Franklin wrote:One day I will be cool like you and have almost 15k posts. Oh wait, no. I won't.Tom Joad wrote:OP's post history is gold.
How about your illiteracy?Tom Joad wrote: Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.
It means exactly what I think it means. Empirical - Adjective - Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Who's next?A. Nony Mouse wrote:I do not think that means what you think it means.Ben Franklin wrote:I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.
GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.Ben Franklin wrote:How about your illiteracy?Tom Joad wrote: Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.
Register now!
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
Too obvious? Someone has to be in law school to know who Ben Franklin was?RELIC wrote: The Ben Franklin username and picture was too obvious bro. Better luck next Troll.
Is that supposed to offend me somehow? It is worth noting that Ben Franklin made more contributions to society than many of the early presidents combined. Only a dumbass would undercut Ben Franklin for not being elected president. But we shouldn't get off topic here.Tom Joad wrote: GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.
Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.Ben Franklin wrote:Is that supposed to offend me somehow? It is worth noting that Ben Franklin made more contributions to society than many of the early presidents combined. Only a dumbass would undercut Ben Franklin for not being elected president. But we shouldn't get off topic here.Tom Joad wrote: GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.
And I suppose Bobby Hill is a far better role model? I tell you hwhut.Tom Joad wrote: Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
You really think you are something else, don't you, asshole? If you are ever in my hood, let me know if you want to throw fisticuffs, because I would be game.Ben Franklin wrote:And I suppose Bobby Hill is a far better role model? I tell you hwhut.Tom Joad wrote: Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.
I think it's slightly hypocritical to make cutting remarks about people with high post counts and then turn around to use your 3 years of lurking on the same website as justification for making a thread like this. Is making 15,000 posts worse than reading 300,000 of them?Ben Franklin wrote:
I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.
Sitting in a law firm as a non-lawyer and reading a crapload of TLS posts doesn't count.Ben Franklin wrote:It means exactly what I think it means. Empirical - Adjective - Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Who's next?A. Nony Mouse wrote:I do not think that means what you think it means.Ben Franklin wrote:I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.
I normally love these kinds of posts. But come on, OP, this is awful. You've genuinely failed to make one good point.Ben Franklin wrote:Here is my theory on why there is a high amount of unemployment amongst law grads. We all know that there are not enough jobs out there to support the amount of students graduating every year. This is 50% the fault of law schools, but also 50% the fault of the applicants.
I theorize that roughly 40-50% of applicants are of the variety that have no business attending law school in the first place. Just because you may be "smart" and can "do well on a standardized test" does not mean that you can, or should, be an attorney. You are better served being a math major, engineer, or something of that nature. Being an attorney requires a blend of social acumen, street smarts, book smarts, and business sense. Again, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO WELL ON THE LSAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD BE APPLYING TO LAW SCHOOL. Unfortunately, law schools will continue to accept and graduate these individuals at a high rate, so long as they have "the numbers".
Yes, there aren't enough jobs to go around, we are all well aware of this fact. But the problem is that too many of you think law is for you, when it isn't. The culture of this country breeds young individuals that carry a grandiose sense of self-perception and entitlement. The result is an influx of kids who think law is for them, because they "were destined to be somebody".
Law might not be for you if:
1. You chose law for lack of something better to do with your life. Having a JD doesn't mean you've made it. Like anything else, it takes years of practice and dedication to be successful. Many young people today do not realize this.
2. You have no friends, rarely get out, and are socially inept. The legal profession, no matter what type of law you choose to practice, requires individuals to have a certain level of social skills. And yes, this includes people that have 10,000+ posts on message boards. This does not, by any stretch of the imagination, make you cool. You might have finally found a way to fit in by becoming a "regular", but many of you are the epitome of the type of person that has no business being an attorney.
3. You think that because you are "smart", that you should be an attorney. I know plenty of attorneys that are dumb as a box of rocks, but are great attorneys.
4. You think that your ability to learn the methods and techniques of a standardized test means that you will be, or should be, an attorney. Again, this is certainly not the case.
5. You think that being a lawyer will make you rich. This sort of ties into reason #1, but has its own number because many people falsely assume that all lawyers make a ton of money. Plenty do, but only those that were dedicated and worked hard. Law is not a get rich quick business.
This rant is mainly directed at those on this forum who discourage people from going to law school, when they themselves should not be going to law school either. I say everyone should follow their dreams, but unless people stop having a blind sense of self-perception, they will keep applying, attending, and graduating in masses. And before some of you on here discourage someone from going to law school, look in the mirror.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Already a member? Login
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login