Christmas Dinner with a Lawyer

[mag360]

you really shouldn't have a problem letting your in-laws know you own guns. No reason to exist in the shadows. Good job setting that idiot straight. "buy machineguns at walmart in nevada" LOL.

This Christmas, I had the benefit of having dinner with my in-laws, one of whom is a recent law school graduate.

I normally keep my mouth shut, because I don't really want them to know I have guns, but during this dinner, I was so frustrated with what I was hearing, I had no choice but to chime in.

Here are a few excerpts from the conversation which are still in my head:

---

LAWYER: You know that amendment to the constitution that lets people have guns? I think it's the first amendment.

ME: It's the second amendment. The first is free speech.

LAWYER: Yes, so this all changed recently, in California you can't shoot someone anymore if they break into your house

ME: You can still shoot someone in self defense. Nothing has changed.

LAWYER: And now because of that they have a 3 day wait on handguns and they are banning shotguns.

ME: It's a 10 day wait and it's for all guns and it's been around for a while and no they are not banning shotguns.

LAWYER: But you can still go to Walmart in Nevada and buy machine guns and bring them back

ME: Walmart doesn't sell machine guns, and you need to be a Nevada resident, and you can only bring in guns that comply with California's laws.

LAWYER: How do you know this?

ME: I just KNOW.

---

Their was more, much more, but these are the parts I remember being ridiculously absurd.

I can't believe this woman is allowed in a court room. Not knowing the constitution is inexcusable for a lawyer.. I always knew she was an idiot, but I didn't realize the idiocy went so deep.

Do they teach people ANYTHING in law school?

[Steyrlp10]

Shucks, from the title of the thread, I thought you were lucky enough to have dinner with Oaklander -- now, that would have been fun

[mud99]

You are right, I shouldn't hide in the shadows.

Oh wait, we are in California.

you really shouldn't have a problem letting your in-laws know you own guns. No reason to exist in the shadows. Good job setting that idiot straight. "buy machineguns at walmart in nevada" LOL.

[Curtis]

OP: I'm glad to spoke up. It sounds like you handled yourself well.

The conversation the OP had is not surprising. As an attorney, it is scary how much a recent law school graduate/newly admitted attorney does not know, but thinks they know. Their legal education is really just beginning. This is why you should always hire an experienced attorney with at least 10 years of experiences.

Law School teaches general legal principles. Most of law school is spent studying general subjects such as Tort, Contracts, Federal Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law (the Second Amendment cases were not taught when I attended law school, and I do not believe they are currently taught), Property, Evidence and Criminal Law.

This is what I say about engineers and engineering school: its an introduction to terms and theory. And no, you can't make $60,000 a year (unless you go to a war zone).

I worked for So Cal Edison's engineering department. All the upper management were USC/UCLA graduates. It was openly expressed that Cal State Fullerton engineering grads had a two year head start on USC/UCLA engineering grads.

[shy 7th]

I can't really speak on what is tought in law school because I've never been, but I can contribute something of interest that I have learned as to why people regurgitate the things they do (i.e. the anti-gun "facts").

Two specific terms from my college studies come immediately to mind:
1. Source Credibility
2. Discounting Cue (in this case, a lack thereof)

Source Credibility is self explanitary: the believability of the source of the information you are being told.

A Discounting Cue is something that tells you that what you are hearing might not be true.
For example, you see a commercial on TV for pills that enlarge your junk. Then you see at the bottom of the screen that these are not approved by the FDA. You might think to yourself: "Hey that's odd either this company didn't submit their drug for approval or they've been denied". Thats your cue. These pills might not do what the commercial says. Sometimes the Source Credibility itself is your cue. Using this same example, the mere fact that this is a TV commercial is your cue that maybe you should take their information with a grain of salt.

In a classroom setting you have a professor and unless he's a total idiot, he usually commands a high Source Credibility. Even if what he's saying might not be true, students tend to absorb it anyways because of the high Source Credibility and also because it might be on the midterm.

Additionally, there are very few discounting cues in the classroom. Maybe the professor might cite some blog or Brady website as their source. Maybe the professor might admit that they are talking out of their *** (unlikely; pompus windbags). Maybe you have prior knowledge of the subject so you ignore the professor's claims.

But in this case, unless the student grew up in a 2A household, they are probably going to absorb the things their professors and peers say as gospel because of the high Source Credibility and lack of Discounting Cues.

It is a good thing you spoke up at your dinner lest this Recently Graduated Law Student convey to your family this misinformation. Information that may have been absorbed because of the assumed credibility that tends to come from the title "Law Student". You, infact, were the discounting cue for your family... well kind of... More like a contradictory Source. Hopefully they heed your credibility...

Of course, for a real mindf*** you all should read up on the Sleeper Effect: how the discoutning cue has the opposite effect and we tend to believe things we shouldn't because of that. A short summary wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_effect

[MontClaire]

You'd be amased at how many idiots are out there and from all walks of life not just attorneys. This law graduate will most likely find that the job she'll get will be in a back office bring me coffee, make a copy. She will be working for adults yes but she won't be one of them.

[The Wingnut]

Graduating from law school does not make you a lawyer, passing the bar exam and practicing as a lawyer makes you one.

...regardless, if she's got that shaky of a grip on the Bill of Rights, her diploma isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

[SamsDX]

They teach them to argue law, not know the law (or the underlying facts).

Part of what they should also be teaching is knowing when you don't know, i.e., a lawyer's got to know her limitations. Without having any practical experience, it's expected that she would know nothing about firearms law (and not just the broad, philosophical underpinnings of the Second Amendment, but the detailed, hyper-technical rules that make up the firearms and self defense legal regime).

At such an early stage in her legal career, it's only natural that she felt insecure. Where a more confident and self-assured lawyer would have simply said, I have no idea about the specifics of how gun laws work in this state, she tried to pool what little information she has on the subject, undoubtedly taken from biased media sources, and hoped that her status as a pseudo-authority/lawyer would carry whatever argument she was making, no matter how factually and legally inaccurate they actually were. Unfortunately for her, she ended up showing just how misinformed and ignorant she actually was, but I guess you gotta hand it to her for trying. Sorry to take a cynical view, but a lot of legal practice comes down to how much you can B.S. your opponent or the judge.

Either way, I would just take it for what it is - insignificant debate at the dinner table, which shows how much further we have to go to educate the general public on the truths about guns.

[Reductio]

I believe the reason the Second Amendment is not studied in law school is because, the bar exams are not focused on the Second Amendment, and very few lawyers actually handle cases involving that amendment. Constitutional law has many subareas of study, and the need to know the Second Amendment is too limited of an area of study.

This. As a current law student, I can say that my con law class spent 50% of the semester covering the Commerce Clause. You can take other classes later if you want to know more on the BoR.

[Wherryj]

I can't really speak on what is tought in law school because I've never been, but I can contribute something of interest that I have learned as to why people regurgitate the things they do (i.e. the anti-gun "facts").

Two specific terms from my college studies come immediately to mind:
1. Source Credibility
2. Discounting Cue (in this case, a lack thereof)

Source Credibility is self explanitary: the believability of the source of the information you are being told.

A Discounting Cue is something that tells you that what you are hearing might not be true.
For example, you see a commercial on TV for pills that enlarge your junk. Then you see at the bottom of the screen that these are not approved by the FDA. You might think to yourself: "Hey that's odd either this company didn't submit their drug for approval or they've been denied". Thats your cue. These pills might not do what the commercial says. Sometimes the Source Credibility itself is your cue. Using this same example, the mere fact that this is a TV commercial is your cue that maybe you should take their information with a grain of salt.

In a classroom setting you have a professor and unless he's a total idiot, he usually commands a high Source Credibility. Even if what he's saying might not be true, students tend to absorb it anyways because of the high Source Credibility and also because it might be on the midterm.

Additionally, there are very few discounting cues in the classroom. Maybe the professor might cite some blog or Brady website as their source. Maybe the professor might admit that they are talking out of their *** (unlikely; pompus windbags). Maybe you have prior knowledge of the subject so you ignore the professor's claims.

But in this case, unless the student grew up in a 2A household, they are probably going to absorb the things their professors and peers say as gospel because of the high Source Credibility and lack of Discounting Cues.

It is a good thing you spoke up at your dinner lest this Recently Graduated Law Student convey to your family this misinformation. Information that may have been absorbed because of the assumed credibility that tends to come from the title "Law Student". You, infact, were the discounting cue for your family... well kind of... More like a contradictory Source. Hopefully they heed your credibility...

Of course, for a real mindf*** you all should read up on the Sleeper Effect: how the discoutning cue has the opposite effect and we tend to believe things we shouldn't because of that. A short summary wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_effect

This article explains the methods pretty well. For those who aren't aware of the term, in residency we call it "pimping" when an attending uses the teaching experience for other purposes-most often ego self inflation, etc.

Even though it is written with respect to medical interactions, it has a wide range of applications:

http://www.neonatology.org/pearls/pimping.html

[Steyrlp10]

Graduating from law school does not make you a lawyer, passing the bar exam and practicing as a lawyer makes you one.

...regardless, if she's got that shaky of a grip on the Bill of Rights, her diploma isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

I'm surrounded by associates who aren't all that familiar with firearm issues/laws, but that's the nice thing about keeping an open mind on their part. I get to tell them about Calguns

However, I agree: if she isn't sure about the topic she's commenting on, it's best to just zip it

[RRichie09]

I'm not a lawyer, but I've been around long enough to know

That experience means much more than classroom book learning

No matter what the field.

School is just the beginning.

I'd say that one of the wisest things a young person can do

Is to figure out what they don't know, and be able to ask for help.

Best post in this thread. Our professors are CONSTANTLY telling us we don't know squat and the trick is to realize what we don't know anything and how to learn it after we get out.

[speedrrracer]

I stopped reading at "recent law school graduate"...

Exactly, and it's not necessarily this woman, it's most recent grads in most fields.

Why? The world is a lot more complicated, but certain standards have remained the same. I'm a software engineer, and 4 years of college isn't enough to teach some kid how to be my intern. They're worse than useless, because I'll have to spend so much time telling them what they need to learn. Everyone knows how much tech has exploded, but 4 years is still just four years, so as the field expands, a recent grad is further and further behind.

I imagine it's true in law -- 3 years of law school hasn't changed since [whenever], but the amount of case law grows every day (along with whatever other factors belong here), and so the relevant niches of law just get deeper, more nuanced and therefore further from a recent grad.

[Agent Orange]

...Our professors are CONSTANTLY telling us we don't know squat and the trick is to realize what we don't know anything and how to learn it after we get out.

It's called metacognition. You probably didn't know that though

[Mulay El Raisuli]

Did she look anything like Reese Witherspoon.......please?

She clearly doesn't have the smarts, so she'll have to look like Ms. Witherspoon if she expects to get anywhere.

Thats nothing - my sister-in-law is a tenured defense attorney, who specializes in getting illegal aliens off. Ultra liberal, ultra anti-gun and all of her family (who we have to spend Christmas eve with) are exactly the same.

I brought my MidwayUSA paper ad with me to Christmas eve at her house, and purchased a Marlin 336 30-30 (from right here on CalGuns) in their living room, then proudly showed them all pictures of my purchase.

I usually keep my mouth shut because I'm outnumbered, but I just felt like twisting their nipples this year.

LOL! Nice!


The Raisuli