Top Law Schools

So in my UG and Grad level classes, I am pretty outspoken. I ask questions if I do not understand a topic, if I feel like I have something meaningful to add in a discussion I add it, etc. In some instances, I have had people come to me and tell me after class "Hey man, thanks for asking that question. I wanted to ask it, however, I just do not like talking in class." I believe that I am paying all this money for school, so I should get as much out of it as possible and participate when I feel I should.

Will this behavior make me a gunner if I choose to attend law school in the Fall? Is being a gunner that bad? Do they get the best grades?

It is my understanding that gunners are those who actively make themselves appear to be law gods and refute/put down anyone else's ideas.

BankruptMe wrote:So in my UG and Grad level classes, I am pretty outspoken. I ask questions if I do not understand a topic, if I feel like I have something meaningful to add in a discussion I add it, etc. In some instances, I have had people come to me and tell me after class "Hey man, thanks for asking that question. I wanted to ask it, however, I just do not like talking in class." I believe that I am paying all this money for school, so I should get as much out of it as possible and participate when I feel I should.

Will this behavior make me a gunner if I choose to attend law school in the Fall? Is being a gunner that bad? Do they get the best grades?

It is my understanding that gunners are those who actively make themselves appear to be law gods and refute/put down anyone else's ideas.

Being seen as a gunner is less about how much you speak and more about coming off as a prick when you do. That said, if you "contribute" in class on a daily basis, you will be tagged as a gunner. And no, gunners don't necessarily get the best grades. Some of the most outspoken ppl also happen to be the dumbest, which is why its annoying that they are outspoken. But ultimately, fuck everybody's opinions. If being outspoken and contributing is the best way for you to learn the material, have at it. If other ppl don't like you for it, screw them.

If you are the person who loves to hear the sound of her/his own voice, who loves to state opinions which are completely irrelevant to what will be on the exam, and who eats up class time with random hypotheticals and questions, you meet my definition of a gunner. Office hours are for those types of things, IMHO. Also, being a gunner =/= getting the best grades.

I'm probably seen as a bit of a gunner but mainly I hate sitting in an uncomfortably silent room where the prof is asking for volunteers, especially when I know most of the class (or at least anyone who did the reading) knows the answer.

BVest wrote:I'm probably seen as a bit of a gunner but mainly I hate sitting in an uncomfortably silent room where the prof is asking for volunteers, especially when I know most of the class (or at least anyone who did the reading) knows the answer.

This is me, too. I only answer questions when there’s that awkward silence, because I hate that awkward silence. There is always going to be awkward silences, and it’s usually on the tougher questions. So waiting until you get to those will show the professor that you actually understand what’s going on.

I rarely give my personal opinion in class because who really cares what the fuck I think? I know I don’t really care what the fuck my classmates’ think, so why should I bore them with what I think? Believing that your opinion should be provided upon every question is the fastest way to become despised, because most folks that feel the need to provide their opinion do so because they can’t answer the actual question. This is something I’m sure you’ve experienced time-and-time-again in undergrad classes.

If you don’t know something, then you’re 100% cheating yourself by not asking. Sure, you may fuck up and ask a question that was literally asked and answered 5 minutes ago, and sure you may ask a question that was VERY CLEARLY answered if you had done the reading, but fuck all that. It’s important that you come away understanding everything you can. We ALL fuck up like this.

Really, the main thing is that no one cares about your opinion. As long as you’re not beginning every answer with “Well, I think…” then you’re good. Also, never use the word “should” in an answer; it’s the fastest way to end up on the shit-end of a professor’s shit list. There is no “should” when answering a black-letter law question.

It is my understanding that gunners are those who actively make themselves appear to be law gods and refute/put down anyone else's ideas.

I don't know if this is the best definition of the archetypical gunner, I think "gunning" behavior is more often people asking questions that have obvious answers, or are deliberately designed to move the class discussion or lecture toward some pet topic/agenda the gunner wants to either discuss or showcase their knowledge of.

Asking questions because you have a legitimate question is never the wrong thing to do, but you may be better served by talking about it with the professor after class or in office hours, when they can better address your specific concern. I've seen professors give outright wrong answers in class because they were clearly thinking about something else and not paying close enough attention to the question asked.

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter whether you are considered a "gunner" or not for getting good grades and getting a job, and I think there are some people that just learn better by asking a lot of questions and staying heavily involved in class discussion. I don't fault these people for that, even if the behavior is probably in the "gunning" territory. Someone that quietly but regularly sucks up to professors in office hours or who pretends to not know whats going on when asked a question is much more irritating in my mind than someone who clearly just enjoys being in class and talking a lot.

You'll be labeled a gunner for talking a lot in class, but BFD. As long as you're not obnoxious or making irrelevant points or slowing down the lecture, you're just saving someone the professor would otherwise call on. I don't think getting good grades is correlated or anti-correlated with speaking in class. Some people who speak a lot do very well, others don't.

rayiner wrote:You'll be labeled a gunner for talking a lot in class, but BFD. As long as you're not obnoxious or making irrelevant points or slowing down the lecture, you're just saving someone the professor would otherwise call on. I don't think getting good grades is correlated or anti-correlated with speaking in class. Some people who speak a lot do very well, others don't.

This.

Some people who talk a lot are actually brilliant and do well, but some aren't and many of the best students aren't gunners and don't engage much w the student cliques or classroom

I respect ppl who work really hard (Gunner Type I), care about the material & do well as long as they don't take up class time w stupid shit and they are chill people

It's the Gunner Type II who tries too hard AND cares too much about how hard you and others try, who's in your face asking awkward q's, putting work ahead of being a decent person, ect. I lose a lot of respect for those gunners who project their own insecurity about their work onto me. But Type I is fine

Also asking relevant Q's in class is Ok generally but when it's <4 minutes until class ends just shut the fuck up and send an email or wait for office hours cause I (and everyone else) want to leave on time and go do something more productive

Just to throw in what someone said and reemphasize it.

Don't change what works for you. If what you're afraid is considered "gunning" works for you and helps you understand the material, keep doing it. Just be sure not to sound like an arrogant jerk when doing so. But don't change what works for you out of fear you'll be label a "gunner."

But note, in final 3 mins of class, don't start asking long questions. And if you're not getting a good answer for your question, drop it, and ask it again later in private. Also, if you notice that people are getting super annoyed with your constant questions, try to maybe adjust, but be wary of what's best for your education.

As long as you're not slowing down the class dwelling on irrelevant points, making up ridiculous hypos, or uttering the phrase "where do we draw the line?", you'll be fine.

Note: at some point you're going to say "where do we draw the line". Just don't make it a default "argument". Also, Con Law sucks. There will be mild gunnery in every class, but Con Law (and to a lesser, but still greater than average extent, Crim Law) can be insufferable at times.

I don't think there is something inherently wrong in asking questions (although be judicious about it, and try to save most of them for email/office hours/after class). But the "if I feel like I have something meaningful to add, I add it" thing and "getting your money's worth" are huge red flags, IMO. I get what people are saying about being a low key gunner not being a huge deal and maybe it's not but I think there might be a danger in being "that guy," even if it just affects your social life/how people remember you forever. They might not hate you if you're a mild gunner, but I think it'll be hard to shake that persona. I can't imagine weighing in with your thoughts on the Commerce Clause helping you master the material, but I can imagine classmates thinking less of you because you have to weigh in with your political philosophy every class period. Maybe that doesn't matter to you but on some level I think it probably should.

Just IMO, YMMV.

First Offense wrote:Also, Con Law sucks. There will be mild gunnery in every class, but Con Law (and to a lesser, but still greater than average extent, Crim Law) can be insufferable at times.

Our Con Law was our least gunnery class. The prof had a script that he intended to get through and it was hard to just keep up with what he was saying. We got to where we welcomed questions from classmates because it took the prof off script which slowed down his speech and gave us time to catch up with notes.

BVest wrote:

First Offense wrote:Also, Con Law sucks. There will be mild gunnery in every class, but Con Law (and to a lesser, but still greater than average extent, Crim Law) can be insufferable at times.

Our Con Law was our least gunnery class. The prof had a script that he intended to get through and it was hard to just keep up with what he was saying. We got to where we welcomed questions from classmates because it took the prof off script which slowed down his speech and gave us time to catch up with notes.

I was really lucky, my Con Law prof was the word's most amazing brilliant prof, and she kept it almost an entirely gunner-free zone. I can see how it would be insufferable. (My class's gunner apocalypse was Crim.)

Every n3rd with their stupid opinion spoke up in both my crim and con law classes. Shoot me, please.