Weed Smoking in Law School? Forum

[A'nold]

Cat fight = great.

Horse girl comment = great.

[TheTopBloke]

Here's something for you to ponder regarding C&F.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernardine_Dohrn

If this lady can teach, then you can smoke up.

You don't have to pass the bar to teach.

Whatever your feelings about drugs and drug laws, I would recommend trying not to break the law while you're in law school. There's a time for rebellion, and your three years as a law student is not that time.

While I agree with you, I use this as an example of how silly the paranoia is over smoking weed or getting speeding tickets or even DUI's.

I'd say people don't worry enough about DUIs. The fact that you say people are overly paranoid about it is frightening.

Why is that frightening to you? In today's terms this lady is a terrorist. She blew shit up, and she's a Northwestern law professor! So I have a DUI and I'm supposed to be paranoid that I'm going to be rejected by the bar for C&F? That's absurd!

[djgoldbe]

Why is that frightening to you? In today's terms this lady is a terrorist. She blew shit up, and she's a Northwestern law professor! So I have a DUI and I'm supposed to be paranoid that I'm going to be rejected by the bar for C&F? That's absurd!

I somewhat misread your post as meaning paranoid about getting a DUI in the future. If you're saying that people who already have a DUI and are paranoid about being rejected from a job, I somewhat agree that they ought not be paranoid, but to say it is anywhere close to on the level of smoking weed or a speeding ticket is absurd. A DUI is a lot more questionable as to C&F than a speeding ticket (depending on the nature of the ticket) or smoking weed.

Edit: I would also say that 2 DUI's ought be enough to be rejected by the bar in certain circumstances (depending on the nature of the DUI and time since the incidents)

[clintonius]

Why is that frightening to you? In today's terms this lady is a terrorist. She blew shit up, and she's a Northwestern law professor! So I have a DUI and I'm supposed to be paranoid that I'm going to be rejected by the bar for C&F? That's absurd!

You didn't even read the wikipedia page you linked to, did you? She was associated with a group that bombed buildings. That's like saying Joe Schmoe the head of the Baptist Church in the Pacific Northwest should be implicated for the murder of George Tiller -- it may well be true, but you haven't provided a whit of evidence for it.

Is a DUI really that easy to get dismissed by the Bar? If so, why? Why is deliberately endangering your life and the lives of others you may encounter less dangerous than expressing a supposedly radical opinion? (Hey, spin goes both ways!)

[GettingReady2010]

What about people who speed? Aren't they endangering their life and the lives of others. Should the bar deny these people also?

[djgoldbe]

What about people who speed? Aren't they endangering their life and the lives of others. Should the bar deny these people also?

Thus why I said depending on the nature of the ticket. Someone who is going 110 in a 55, yes. Going 50 in a 35, not so much. Common sense.

Edit: Would also depend on the number of offenses and time elapsed since the last one, as before.

[clintonius]

What about people who speed? Aren't they endangering their life and the lives of others. Should the bar deny these people also?

Thus why I said depending on the nature of the ticket. Someone who is going 110 in a 55, yes. Going 50 in a 35, not so much. Common sense.

Edit: Would also depend on the number of offenses and time elapsed since the last one, as before.

Common sense, or perhaps the difference in the classification of the ticket (speeding vs. reckless endangerment, etc). With a case-by-case review if there actually is a chance of being denied by C&F.

My point wasn't anything to do with tickets and being denied by the Bar, by the way. I was pointing out that TheTopBloke's comment was pretty nonsensical, or at least definitely arguable.

[emilybeth]

Cat fight = great.

Horse girl comment = great.

Both of these statements are true.

I can't believe this thread is still going.

[cynthia rose]

seeing a therapist can create c&f issues? is this for real? Or just previous mental disorders?

No one ever responded to this question. I want to know if this is for real, too. C&F issues for needing someone to talk to doesn't seem fair.

[GettingReady2010]

seeing a therapist can create c&f issues? is this for real? Or just previous mental disorders?

No one ever responded to this question. I want to know if this is for real, too. C&F issues for needing someone to talk to doesn't seem fair.

If you have severe mental disabilities that are going to impact the way you practice, the bar needs to look into that. They're not trying to find out if you had trouble communicating with your parent when you were 16.

[TheTopBloke]

Why is that frightening to you? In today's terms this lady is a terrorist. She blew shit up, and she's a Northwestern law professor! So I have a DUI and I'm supposed to be paranoid that I'm going to be rejected by the bar for C&F? That's absurd!

You didn't even read the wikipedia page you linked to, did you? She was associated with a group that bombed buildings. That's like saying Joe Schmoe the head of the Baptist Church in the Pacific Northwest should be implicated for the murder of George Tiller -- it may well be true, but you haven't provided a whit of evidence for it.

Is a DUI really that easy to get dismissed by the Bar? If so, why? Why is deliberately endangering your life and the lives of others you may encounter less dangerous than expressing a supposedly radical opinion? (Hey, spin goes both ways!)

http://www.hulu.com/watch/118170/the-we ... nderground

[TheTopBloke]

This is incredibly stupid. According to some posters, I'm more likely to be a threat to public safety by getting a speeding ticket or a DUI then blowing shit up. I might as well start a revolution. Maybe if I put that on my resume they'll give me full ride to Northwestern.

[GettingReady2010]

Hmmmm. I think I remember something about a guy who bombed NYC Police headquarters and is now a tenured professor at a university in IL.

[legalease9]

Here is the link to Gonzales v. Raich. I don't like this decision, but it is set in stone (until the Supreme court's composition changes at least). The feds rule on this issue, and Pot possession is a federal offense in all situations in all locations.

What I find most interesting about this case is that the Conservatives (minus Scalia) were the ones supporting Californian's right to toke up. The liberals were the ones to condemn it. This is of course because it was a state's rights vs Fed Rights issue in their eyes. Not a policy issue regarding whether medical marijuana should be legalized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._raich

[clintonius]

This is incredibly stupid. According to some posters, I'm more likely to be a threat to public safety by getting a speeding ticket or a DUI then blowing shit up. I might as well start a revolution. Maybe if I put that on my resume they'll give me full ride to Northwestern.

What's incredibly stupid is your moving the goalposts. My comments were never about whether the Weather Underground members were more dangerous than drunk drivers. They were about the fact that your reasoning is ridiculous: "this woman can teach, therefore, why be paranoid about doing something completely unrelated that I'm going to claim is less harmful without providing any evidence that 1. establishes that assertion as fact, or 2. establishes that the Bar (which you'll recall, topbloke, *conducts* these investigations), actually buys into the assertion."

And common courtesy would be to at least give me a time frame to fast-forward to, rather than expecting me to watch a 90-minute video to further an internet debate.

[djgoldbe]

This is incredibly stupid. According to some posters, I'm more likely to be a threat to public safety by getting a speeding ticket or a DUI then blowing shit up. I might as well start a revolution. Maybe if I put that on my resume they'll give me full ride to Northwestern.

What's incredibly stupid is your moving the goalposts. My comments were never about whether the Weather Underground members were more dangerous than drunk drivers. They were about the fact that your reasoning is ridiculous: "this woman can teach, therefore, why be paranoid about doing something completely unrelated that I'm going to claim is less harmful without providing any evidence that 1. establishes that assertion as fact, or 2. establishes that the Bar (which you'll recall, topbloke, *conducts* these investigations), actually buys into the assertion."

And common courtesy would be to at least give me a time frame to fast-forward to, rather than expecting me to watch a 90-minute video to further an internet debate.

+1, and also since when was Character and Fitness determined by the level of threat you pose to public safety? A revolutionary can be of perfectly good Character and Fitness and be horribly dangerous to public safety. If the same revolutionary decided to walk around drunk with a loaded weapon, I'd think that would be a far larger C&F question than a political agenda which may or may not reflect C&F. The two are not necessarily related.

Dunno why I am responding to the absurdity of your comparison, though.

[ScaredWorkedBored]

Committing criminal offenses or demonstrating substance abuse in law school generally makes your bar admission considerably more interesting. Unless you feel you'd enjoy that, don't commit criminal offenses or abuse substances in law school.

[Eric475]

In a few years weed's probably gonna be legal and taxed in plenty of states anyway. I know NH has considered it. Libertarianism ftw

[D. H2Oman]

Why do guys have to smoke Marijuana, can't you just smoke a different weed? May I suggest the Japanese Knotweed.


--ImageRemoved--


This shit is invasive, get rid of it and everyone is happy!

[Eric475]

Why do guys have to smoke Marijuana, can't you just smoke a different weed? May I suggest the Japanese Knotweed.


This shit is invasive, get rid of it and everyone is happy!

Interesting. Have your tried it? What are the psychological effects. There is one other (legal) weed, "Salvia Divinorum" which pretty much destroys all reality for about 3 minutes. How it's legal is beyond me.

[Patriot1208]

Committing criminal offenses or demonstrating substance abuse in law school generally makes your bar admission considerably more interesting. Unless you feel you'd enjoy that, don't commit criminal offenses or abuse substances in law school.

But, I just want to have fun... c'mon guys weed is fun, who really thinks that far in advance.

[D Brooks]

ITT: people who need to smoke more pot.

Credited.

[Patriot1208]

ITT: people who should take risks with their future

[pleasetryagain]

ITT: people who should take risks with their future

ITT: Why so serious???

[Patriot1208]

ITT: people who should take risks with their future

ITT: Why so serious???

Not necessarily trying to be, just don't understand why people are so content on putting their futures in danger for weed.