Friday, April 17, 2009

How can I get a law firm to pay for my law degree?

I've heard that larger law firms will pay for your law school if you commit to work for them afterwards. Where can I find information about this?


If it's in the UK then once you do a training contract with them the larger law firms will pay for your fees both LPC and sometimes university fees. But what you need to do is prove that you are worth investing in and also sometimes you must continue with the firm for a designated period, even after the training contract, if offered the opportunity, otherwise you may have to pay the firm back for paying your fees.

You would have to already be employed by them. The larger law firms would NEVER commit to hire a law school graduate before they ever started law school, unless the person was currently working for them as a paralegal and they knew the value of that individual. Even so, I've known a number of people who had been working as paralegals for large firms, who continued to work for those firms during law school, and who got hired by those firms as attorneys afterward, and even they didn't get their tuition paid for by the firm. It must be an unusual situation for them to do that.

What is the open container law in Boston, not regarding motor vehicles?

I thought I remember reading somewhere that Boston doesn't actually have an open container law, but I can't find any information on the laws aside from the ones regarding motor vehicles.


The vast majority of U.S. states and localities prohibit possessing and/or consuming an open container of alcohol in public (i.e. on the street). Only seven states (Georgia, Louisiana, Virginia, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, and Pennsylvania) have no state law against general public possession and/or consumption of an open container by a person of legal drinking age, although nearly all local jurisdictions in those states do prohibit public open containers.

Follow the LINK below for a more detailed explanation.

If its not regarding a motor vehicle what could it be regarding? I don't think its against the law to have an open container if your not in a motor vehicle.

Get caught with one and you will find your sorry a$s in trouble

What do law enforcement see when they check your license plate?

What do law enforcement see when they check your license plate?


As far as the vehicle, you will get a make, model, style, and color. It will also check the stolen vehicle files. If the vehicle is was associated with a felony, or with a missing person, that will return also.

It will show if the registration is current, and when it expires.

It also provides the owners name and address, some states provide the owner's drivers license number also.

It will also indicate if the vehicle is leased, and if a bank holds a lien.

In my jurisdiction we get all that trooper said except the lien info, that stuff comes from the state computers.

Our local city computer automatically takes the state info and runs the owner name for warrants, local and national and drivers license info. So we would know if the owner of the vehicle had a suspended/revoked license.

All this pops up on the car terminal.

We can use the terminal for further searches but that is what comes up automatically.

It will depend on the system.

Our basic system shows, vehicle details such as make, model, color year, registered owner's name and address. Whether the vehicle has any "hits"...ATLs, warrants etc.

Then the officer can run the R/O which will show warrants and driving status.

Our new system will immediately alert to Revoked/Denied/Suspended driving status.

Yeah they will know if your license is suspended or revoked when they compare your drivers license to your license plate number. They can also see who owns the car, If you have any warrants out for your arrest, or if you have any DWI or DUI.

A couple of letters and some numbers.

They will call the plate in to headquarters where the state computers will divulge the owner, year, color and type of vehicle they belong to.

They see whether the car is properly registered, who it is registered to and if there are any outstanding warrants against it.

All kinds of things - including traffic tickets, warrants issued against you in any of the 50 states, your criminal history in the state...

The owner of the car, their address, phone #, criminal record and any outstanding warrants, I am guessing.

To see if you've been arrested in the past for prostitution so they can fondle you in the back seat. That goes for male and female officers

What do law enforcement see when they check your license plate?

What do law enforcement see when they check your license plate?


As far as the vehicle, you will get a make, model, style, and color. It will also check the stolen vehicle files. If the vehicle is was associated with a felony, or with a missing person, that will return also.

It will show if the registration is current, and when it expires.

It also provides the owners name and address, some states provide the owner's drivers license number also.

It will also indicate if the vehicle is leased, and if a bank holds a lien.

In my jurisdiction we get all that trooper said except the lien info, that stuff comes from the state computers.

Our local city computer automatically takes the state info and runs the owner name for warrants, local and national and drivers license info. So we would know if the owner of the vehicle had a suspended/revoked license.

All this pops up on the car terminal.

We can use the terminal for further searches but that is what comes up automatically.

It will depend on the system.

Our basic system shows, vehicle details such as make, model, color year, registered owner's name and address. Whether the vehicle has any "hits"...ATLs, warrants etc.

Then the officer can run the R/O which will show warrants and driving status.

Our new system will immediately alert to Revoked/Denied/Suspended driving status.

Yeah they will know if your license is suspended or revoked when they compare your drivers license to your license plate number. They can also see who owns the car, If you have any warrants out for your arrest, or if you have any DWI or DUI.

A couple of letters and some numbers.

They will call the plate in to headquarters where the state computers will divulge the owner, year, color and type of vehicle they belong to.

They see whether the car is properly registered, who it is registered to and if there are any outstanding warrants against it.

All kinds of things - including traffic tickets, warrants issued against you in any of the 50 states, your criminal history in the state...

The owner of the car, their address, phone #, criminal record and any outstanding warrants, I am guessing.

To see if you've been arrested in the past for prostitution so they can fondle you in the back seat. That goes for male and female officers

How to study an external law course effectively?

I am currently doing University of London's external law degree. As everyone know, it is hard especially for people leaving outside UK like me. Pls tell me effective ways to study the rigorious subjects of law and score good marks.

I appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thank You.


londonexternal.ac.uk/.../laws/course_out...

try signing up with an institute that offers tutoring for the course. Make sure you have all the relevant text books etc and follow the subject guides they give you. Good Luck!

How to study an external law course effectively?

I am currently doing University of London's external law degree. As everyone know, it is hard especially for people leaving outside UK like me. Pls tell me effective ways to study the rigorious subjects of law and score good marks.

I appreciate any comments and suggestions. Thank You.


londonexternal.ac.uk/.../laws/course_out...

try signing up with an institute that offers tutoring for the course. Make sure you have all the relevant text books etc and follow the subject guides they give you. Good Luck!

What law is there agains pornography in theaters? Movie regulations?

I know about MPAA, and NATO, and those censoring associations, but those aren't law. They're voluntary. What law is there against someone opening a theater and playing home made pornographic material in it? What's to stop children from going in there? What are the laws, and where can they be found? Citations please. Thanks.


Displaying "obscene" material is illegal.

What's obscene? Ah, there's the rub ! Most laws define it in terms of "offensive to community standards of decency". That means that what's OK to screen in New York City might be obscene in Hicksville, Georgia. So you can go to a peep show store or porno theatre in Times Square and watch porn that you couldn't even rent to watch in your own home in Hicksville.

With regard to children, the laws there are tighter. Anyone who displays "indecent" material to a child is breaking the law.

Again, what's "indecent"? Well, it's whatever the jury decides it is, again, based on "Community Standards." As an example, the monthly magazine of the American Association for Nude Recreation frequently shows photos of happy families playing naked on the beach in some tropical paradise. It's distributed through the US Mail with no problems - but there are some uptight communities where public nudity is considered offensive to community standards, and it can't be delivered.

Richard

What is the United States law that requires an item to be sold at its listed price?

I believe that in the United States, there is a law that requires items to be sold at the price listed, even if it is accidentally listed at an incorrect price. Is there anyone that can corroborate that fact with a name of a law, the text of it, or any such backing? Even if it's information off some website?

By the way, I'm from New Jersey, if that makes a difference.


I think you are referring to the bait and switch law.

It basically means that if they advertise something for a certain price they MUST sell it for that price (but read the fine print about limited quantity and at what store locations)

What do you mean by listed price? If it is an advertised price and its a typo, no, as long as the seller wasn't intentionally misleading. If it is the price marked on a small item, at say a grocery store, most stores will refund the entire price if you prove the listed price is different than the cost the at the register. If it is the Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price, it depends on which state you are in, and I don't know New Jersey's law. Some states have laws requiring the customer to be informed in the price is above retail.

More information would be helpful.

No such law. That would be interference with a right of contract. Some companies require, as a condition of sale, that a product be sold at a specific price. That's not a law. That's the company determining its sale price and conditions of sale. Apple computers or Bose Sound Systems are examples. Car manufacturers will give a MSRP for new cars but that is not a requirement of sale since a lot of dealers will discount the MSRP. The closest you could come to a law requiring sales at a listed price would be for regulated utilities so that kilowatt usage must be sold to consumers at the regulatory approved price.

List price is often called "MSRP", or Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price. There's no law mandating that because, as it's name states, it's only a suggestion. Most businesses won't sell an item above list price, because informed consumers know that it's a rip off.

I think what you're referring to is "False Advertising", and while most businesses will honor their advertisements to avoid civil suits, there's no law compelling them to.

There is no such law. There is a recommended retail price that is usually put on a tag. Businesses are free to raise or lower that price as the market allows.

Its called the "fair trade act". You can research it, it doesn't have to do with International trade, I believe it was enacted around 1911.

google it!

What kind of jobs are available to those with Law Enforcement experience?

I plan on becoming a police officer, but only want to do it for a few years since I am not a big fan of working for the government. If I had say 4 years of Law enforcement experience, what other jobs would be available to me? Private Security Firm or a PMC would be nice but anything else? Thanks.


Prison officer, anything in security (I have a cousin that runs security for a big organisation and he earns a lot so that could be quite good for you), you could become a private consultant within security, or perhaps even train as personal security (and work in the entertainment world as a bodyguard). A police officer background is actually a very good 'in' for a lot of professions, as it makes people trust you. Good luck!

with that experience you could get pretty much any local govt. job. and probably some state jobs too.... i got a job in law enforcement as a police dispatcher and i had no experience. It also depends on where you live...

What kind of jobs are available to those with Law Enforcement experience?

I plan on becoming a police officer, but only want to do it for a few years since I am not a big fan of working for the government. If I had say 4 years of Law enforcement experience, what other jobs would be available to me? Private Security Firm or a PMC would be nice but anything else? Thanks.


Prison officer, anything in security (I have a cousin that runs security for a big organisation and he earns a lot so that could be quite good for you), you could become a private consultant within security, or perhaps even train as personal security (and work in the entertainment world as a bodyguard). A police officer background is actually a very good 'in' for a lot of professions, as it makes people trust you. Good luck!

with that experience you could get pretty much any local govt. job. and probably some state jobs too.... i got a job in law enforcement as a police dispatcher and i had no experience. It also depends on where you live...

What is the penalty in illinois for practicing law without a licensed? What website can I go to find out?

Charles Brady has six counts of unlicensed practice of law in Miami and I want to know if he was tried in illinois, what would be the penalties.


"The remedies available include, but are not limited to: (i) appropriate equitable relief; (ii) a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000, which shall be paid to the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation; and (iii) actual damages."

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1853&ChapAct=705%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B205%2F&ChapterID=50&ChapterName=COURTS&ActName=Attorney+Act%2E

What is the penalty in illinois for practicing law without a licensed? What website can I go to find out?

Charles Brady has six counts of unlicensed practice of law in Miami and I want to know if he was tried in illinois, what would be the penalties.


"The remedies available include, but are not limited to: (i) appropriate equitable relief; (ii) a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000, which shall be paid to the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation; and (iii) actual damages."

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1853&ChapAct=705%26nbsp%3BILCS%26nbsp%3B205%2F&ChapterID=50&ChapterName=COURTS&ActName=Attorney+Act%2E

What is the difference between legal studies and law?

If I take up a legal studies degree, what is the difference between that and a law degree?

Which degree would be of use if I plan to be a solicitor/lawyer?

Thank you!


The difference is news to me. Legal studies lead to a law degree, as far as I know. Why don't you ask the guys who offer the courses you are referring to?

legal studies implies to a particular legal-related courses as an undergraduate major

Should I go to law school in Georgia or Virginia? Which is a better state to live and practice in?

I'm debating whether I should go to UGA law or a law school in Virginia. I am from the Atlanta area. What is Northern Virginia and the Virginia Beach area like? I have never been there but have heard that it's really pretty. I don't want to live in a place that's too cold or has too much traffic. I also want to live in a somewhat wealthy area, as I want to practice in estate & wealth planning. Any recommendations?


UVA is one of the nation's top law schools and you can go practice law anywhere after you get the degree. Northern Virginia has terrible traffic but lots of jobs for lawyers. Housing prices are also very high. Fairfax County, VA is one of the wealthiest in the USA.

I've lived in Northern VA, outside of VA Beach, and Atlanta. In terms of traffic, both areas of Virginia have horrendous traffic, although it's comparable to Atlanta's traffic. If the traffic is really an issue, stick with UGA. Athens doesn't have bad traffic at all. Furthermore, although you mention you want to live in a wealthy area, the cost of living for both parts of Virginia will be tough on a law school stipend. UGA may not be as great of a school for law as some of the options in VA, but monetarily and trafficwise, it may be the better option. The winters around VA Beach aren't too bad, and of course the DC area is pretty cold. Both places are great to live though.

You're not asking for much now are you? I'm sure supporters of both states will have their reasons for selecting their respective states. But if you're looking for wealth, I don't think you're going to find much better than the suburban Washington area.

Also, U of Virginia is highly rated, I would think right up there with Duke. And you've have better connections to the high rollers.

Va Beach on the Atlantic> I've been there, & it's beautiful, but mobbed with tourists from Jun -Aug, & has all of its attendant souvenir stands, tee shirt shops, & family restaurants that specialize in quantity, not necessarily quality. But once you get off of the strip, it's a very nice city.

What is a situation where there is a choice to be made between the law and morals?

Anything from movies or literature would be great. EX: In the novel the adventures of huckleberry finn, huck has the choice to turn in his friend whos a runaway slave because it is the law and if he doesnt obey the law he was told he'd go to hell. He then decides that he will go to hell and not turn in his friend. This was a choice of morals rather than the law.


H.G. Wells' Time Machine shows a good example when the Time Traveler defies the Morlocks - whose word is law - because it is the right and moral thing to do.

In Jane Eyre, though it's not the choice between LAW and morality, Jane does defy her own inclinations and obey the moral code by leaving Mr. Rochester.

You could see an example of this in the non-fiction book The Hiding Place by Corrie ten Boom. The ten Boom family defied the law (of the Nazi's) that made sheltering, aiding and abetting Jewish people against the law. They did what was morally right by saving as many Jewish people as they could and ended up going to concentration camps themselves.

There are tons in Harry Potter. For example, in Prisoner of Azkaban, they (Hermione and Harry) saved Buckbeak because he did nothing wrong, and Sirius, too. Those two went into hiding together.

The Death Penalty is a good one.

death penalty

Fahrenheit 451: Montag decides to read and distribute books in search of a greater truth despite the illegality of them.

The law is a guide line, morals is the life line. laws of society can change but moral laws of conduct can save a life.

What is a situation where there is a choice to be made between the law and morals?

Anything from movies or literature would be great. EX: In the novel the adventures of huckleberry finn, huck has the choice to turn in his friend whos a runaway slave because it is the law and if he doesnt obey the law he was told he'd go to hell. He then decides that he will go to hell and not turn in his friend. This was a choice of morals rather than the law.


H.G. Wells' Time Machine shows a good example when the Time Traveler defies the Morlocks - whose word is law - because it is the right and moral thing to do.

In Jane Eyre, though it's not the choice between LAW and morality, Jane does defy her own inclinations and obey the moral code by leaving Mr. Rochester.

You could see an example of this in the non-fiction book The Hiding Place by Corrie ten Boom. The ten Boom family defied the law (of the Nazi's) that made sheltering, aiding and abetting Jewish people against the law. They did what was morally right by saving as many Jewish people as they could and ended up going to concentration camps themselves.

There are tons in Harry Potter. For example, in Prisoner of Azkaban, they (Hermione and Harry) saved Buckbeak because he did nothing wrong, and Sirius, too. Those two went into hiding together.

The Death Penalty is a good one.

death penalty

Fahrenheit 451: Montag decides to read and distribute books in search of a greater truth despite the illegality of them.

The law is a guide line, morals is the life line. laws of society can change but moral laws of conduct can save a life.

What is a possible law that should be implemented in California?

I need to do a reserch paper about a law that should be implemented in the State of California, or a law that should be removed, does anybody have any sujestions?


A law that should be forced: You may have welfare for up to three years while going to school/job-training, and after you receive a job, payments will be taken from your check, in affordable amounts to pay back the taxpayer. 2nd: No illegal shall receive CA taxpayer assistance, and will be arrested if caught by police, citizens, and/or border patrol.

CA State laws that should be rescinded is the opposite of the above. Illegals are responsible for $33,000,000 of CA's recession, and so are the welfare lifetimers, although their debts to the taxpayer exceeds illegals.

The state should have the constitution changed to establish a unicameral legislature. Although there are separate procedural rules for the California State Senate and the State Assembly and different responsibilities for each, it would be prudent to eliminate the expense of operating two separate legislative bodies. Nebraska has a unicameral legislature and it is clear that there is a precedent elsewhere in the country.

How about the legislators agree to split the state up into 4 states so SF and LA areas can have all the homosexual marriage, universal healthcare, and high taxes they want, and the valley and northern CA can be left alone, and get a little representation on the national scene.

Amend the 3 strikes law so that in order to convict an individual under three strikes and send them to prison for life the third or subsequent offense must be a violent felony, not some bullshit non-violent misdemeanor.

There was some kind of land use law passed while Clinton was in the White house that closed a lot of land to the people. That needs to be reversed.

The Beach closure after certain hours and anti smoking laws need to go away too.

Sure. Fund education and police in separate transparent accounts so politicians can't misuse bonds intended for those purposes and keep raising taxes because education and police protection still need more, the prior money having been misused....

thats easy

california citizens must not ask stupid questions.

and

california citizens must know how to spell.

are you looking, Arnie?

I'm with Yaya. No more phony "Total Recall" governors who came in complaining about a $10 billion budget shortfall and the need for fiscal responsibility only to run up a $42 billion one. Hasta la vista, baby!

Stop providing sanctuary for illegals.

No more wacky governors.

a ban on Nancy Pelosi and people like her

What should you do if you know someone breaking the copyright law?

I have to write a report for school about a person (John) who buys a computer game and then copies it and sells the copies.

What should I do if I know that a friend is breaking the law? I'll explain to him that he is breaking the law and that he should stop. But should I report him? If so, where?


Its not up to you. he knows he is breaking the law. don't tattle.

Would this undergraduate major be acceptable for pursuing law?

I am pursuing a Bac. Degree in public relations and planning on attending law school afterwards. Is that a good choice? I am planning on being a lawyer that deals with all kinds of disputes.


It's probably not the best choice, but it's OK. It'll give you a liberal arts degree, and that's a decent degree for law school. However: Why PR, if you're planning on becoming a lawyer? I have a background in journalism (and am a member of the Public Relations Society of America), and while journalism and PR are perfectly OK, there's a wide gap between those disciplines and law.

If you have the opportunity, take some classes that touch on law. (In journalism school, I took a couple that involved journalism and the law.) That'll at least expose you to some educational experience in the area, and may help a bit on your applications to law school.

Hope that helps.

There is no particular undergrad degree required as a prereq for law school. I majored in legal studies and minored in sociology because I thought that might put me at a bit of an advantage.

Any degree that requires a lot of reading/writing/researching is the best. That i what law is all about.

Any major is fine, as long as you finish college with a very good GPA and good writing skills. I'm more concerned about why you want to be a lawyer -- you should have a good handle on that before you shell out the money for law school, and you'll eventually need to chart a career path more specific than "dealing with all kinds of disputes."

Yes, PR is a fine undergrad program for law school. True, it won't be as "good" as being in a formal pre-law program, but there are plenty that studied other things. And PR happens to an area that would be appropriate.

Pretty much any degree will work for law school, as long as you have excellent grades and score well on the LSAT. In time you may discover that you will need to specialize in what type of law you practice.

Environmental law will be big in a few years.

maybe you could study a bit of env science.

oil companies and large manufacturers will be needing people like this.

ooo a corporate lawyer oooo

/

Would this undergraduate major be acceptable for pursuing law?

I am pursuing a Bac. Degree in public relations and planning on attending law school afterwards. Is that a good choice? I am planning on being a lawyer that deals with all kinds of disputes.


It's probably not the best choice, but it's OK. It'll give you a liberal arts degree, and that's a decent degree for law school. However: Why PR, if you're planning on becoming a lawyer? I have a background in journalism (and am a member of the Public Relations Society of America), and while journalism and PR are perfectly OK, there's a wide gap between those disciplines and law.

If you have the opportunity, take some classes that touch on law. (In journalism school, I took a couple that involved journalism and the law.) That'll at least expose you to some educational experience in the area, and may help a bit on your applications to law school.

Hope that helps.

There is no particular undergrad degree required as a prereq for law school. I majored in legal studies and minored in sociology because I thought that might put me at a bit of an advantage.

Any degree that requires a lot of reading/writing/researching is the best. That i what law is all about.

Any major is fine, as long as you finish college with a very good GPA and good writing skills. I'm more concerned about why you want to be a lawyer -- you should have a good handle on that before you shell out the money for law school, and you'll eventually need to chart a career path more specific than "dealing with all kinds of disputes."

Yes, PR is a fine undergrad program for law school. True, it won't be as "good" as being in a formal pre-law program, but there are plenty that studied other things. And PR happens to an area that would be appropriate.

Pretty much any degree will work for law school, as long as you have excellent grades and score well on the LSAT. In time you may discover that you will need to specialize in what type of law you practice.

Environmental law will be big in a few years.

maybe you could study a bit of env science.

oil companies and large manufacturers will be needing people like this.

ooo a corporate lawyer oooo

/

What Law Enforcement Agency can you go to when you find suspicious activity on the Internet?

I've been getting very suspisous emial from people on the net. I would like to report this to some form of law enforcement agency. WHo would be the best choice.


Report it to your ISP or this guy.

What.. You a dime dropin NARC???

FBI, I had to file a report with them when someone sent me an offer for a money laundering type scheme.

FBI or FCC, Local is a good idea, but once a data packet leaves a PC it goes into Federal Jurisdiction. If offender and victom are in the same state, Your State Troopers, or Your State Law Enforcement , if is cross town, Local Sherrif or Police.

FBI, as internet uses interstate wires, which makes it a federal issue.

Either your local or state police departments. If you want, you can go federal and go straight to the FBI.

your county aka the sheriff

ROFL... yea, go straight to the FBI... good luck with that....

Take it to your local/state police, or the county sheriffs office... you can't just give the FBI a call and chit chat... sigh.

If the local police believe it is legitimate, then they will contact the FBI, but they won't always do the investigations... depends on the circumstances.

If U are Living in India u can go to cyber crimes. For evrything there is a police station in USA.

What is a recent law concerning stem cells?

I need to find a recent law (federal or state) that was passed concerning stem cells for a report. Does anyone know where I can find this information because I've looked in various places and was unable to find a recent law within the last 2 years that was passed.


Michigan just passed a proposition for Stem Cell Research. Proposal 2.

laws and initiatives

"The "Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative"

Doe v Klein

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/10/lawyer-represen.html

Knieriem v. Group Health Plan, Inc.

Siade had an employer-sponsored health care plan provided by Group Health Plan, Inc (GHP). The plan was governed by ERISA. GHP issued the health insurance policy for the plan. In 2001, Siade was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and sought GHP's pre-approval for an allogeneic stem cell transplant. GHP denied coverage on the basis the procedure was "investigational and unproven" and therefore excluded under the plan's policy."

Doe v. Shalala

http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/3587258-1.html

http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselawsitemap/Federal-Courts-4th-Circuit-Court-of-Appeals-100220-1-2004.html

Cicio v. Does, 321 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 2003) (dr denied use of stem cell treatment for cancer patient)

What do I need to do, to try to change a law, or how do I find people who are already attempting it?

I have fought too many battles the last 5 years in court involving my ex, the county we live in, child support issues, and the special needs of my sons in regards to all the above. I have come to realize that our legal system is not going to seek justice, or even fair play in regards to me, or my sons, so I would like to attempt to connect with people who are in the process of changing certain laws in regards to child support/visitation/medical responsiblity, etc. Do you know of a group, or site, or any information I can find in regards to who and what is being politically lobbied, and if not, do you know how a person with few resources would begin the process of trying to have a law changed?

Thank you for your time.


Talk to your local congressman or representative. That person fields questions and comments about all sorts of laws each day, and I guarantee it includes child support and medical responsibility issues. He or she would definately have contacts to any key individuals or organizations regarding your desires for a law change.

Furthermore, this individual is responsible for initiating law changes and is the person who can help you accomplish that mission.

Good luck.

BTW, to find your representative or congressman, go to http://www.house.gov/

How tough is it to complete a law degree?

I am starting mine in a couple of months. I will be doing it part time while working full time. Can anyone with experience of law study tell me how tough it is, and any tips would be great. Cheers


I went to evening classes at Mc george law school in Calif. It took 4 years instead of the ful time 3. you are lucky to find a school that offers part time.

it will be difficult as your job may interfere with homework reading. Try to get a job like warehouse watchman or hotel night clerk that allows you to read at wrok. there is a lot of reading but not very many written assignments so you tend to cheat on the reading anyway as it does not get discovered until you get an exam or get asked a question in class. you have to be very self disciplined in law school.

they do not spoon feed you but expect you to take the reins immediately and get on with it from your own incentive. you must do more than asked to do.

working part time also makes it harder to set up a study group and you really need one.it takes deep discourse with others to bring out the important nuances and mastery required.

I used some shortcut type books with synopsized types of law instruction to simplify the basics or review them. There are always many available. " nutshell" series is one.

There is no substitute for grinding on the various versions of the law in scholarly treatises, which are optional, but a quick mind and creative thought and earnest classroom atendence, participation and attention are what got me through. i did not have money for the treatises or time to read them. I found the law professors appreciated a refreshing point of view more than regurgitating what the elder scholars had written about an issue. So in a way, it helped me to NOT study the old masters as I was untainted by their othodoxy and able to invent new arguments on what was essentially a blank slate (my unstudied brain) . This was perceived as enthusiasm and extra effort by the professors.

Brownie points do not help in the exams thought. they do not know whose paper they are grading and many times your exam papers are graded by another student etc. So you must master the basics and then you can fill in the blanks with BS so long as i is cogent. there are no correct answers in law, just good arguments. So get good rest and take vitamins and do not drink or waste your time. LISTEN and take careful notes and do NOT miss anu classes. Have a pal that shares notes if you must miss one. The READ your notes and go to the professors office to ask questions on points that are unclear. get it clear before the exam.

most exams are essay so learn to write write write. You are there not to memorize law, but to understand principles and percepts and then apply them to fact situations. it is very interesting and fun to study cases. read all the cases assigned. they are good way to learn and the traditional way to learn.

BRIEF each case and reveiw them before class and ASK questions. Volunteer answers if you think of one. It stimulates discussion and aids your learning and that of others even if you are wrong. being wrong is actually the BEST way to learn, but only if you discover it in time. make the mistakes in class, not the exam.

Later, in practice at your profession. you will avoid making mistakes in court, whcih is the real exams.

Do not dispair or give up if you hit an area that is impossible for you. Plow through and do your best and take a C if you have to. you only have to get 75% to pass law school. you do not have to know 100% of evrything to be a good attorney. you will narrow your practice to certain areas you like anyway and avoid those you hate or are weak in but you still have to endure those times in school when you feel dumb. just endure it.

Take each class in turn and focus on it. do not get all upset about all the classes you must learn. it is like eating an elephant. you do it one bite at a time. same as a chicken. ( by the way, elephant tastes a lot like chicken) keep your sense of humor and make friends. you will appreciate them later in your career. i still see my old law school buddies after being retired.

I will ot wish you good luck, you do not need it. law school is a meritocracy. work hard and be the best you can and it will be good enough. you do not have to be class valedictorian.

last note

attend all classes , even if you feel unprepared and you know he is going to call on you ( or she). if you screw up it is OK and better than missing the class. learn to control embarras emnt and learn form failings and errors. You will get a lot more in real life so now is the time to learn to cope. that is why it is called school. the professors want to make you cringe and fail as a way to teach you to try harder and know what the real pressure is like. Judges are the real pressure and they delight in watching you screw up a case. it makes their day. It gets boring being a judge so they like to mess with your mind. get used to it in law school and develop a quick mind and thick skin and learn to bow and scrape. It will help you win cases later.

Hi,

A law degree is as hard as you make it. If you fall behind with the work it is difficult to catch up so stay on top of it.

Try to keep abreast of new case law and legislation. Things can change very rapidly. Make sure you do your assigned reading, it is given you for a reason.

If there is something you don't understand ask your tutor, it is what they get paid for, some areas of law can be quite complex, especially equity and trusts.

The very best of luck with your studies

Can a common law marriage from Texas be legally recognized in Louisiana?

My fiance and I just got a declaration of informal marriage from the county clerks office here in Texas. His job is based out of Louisiana and they are telling us that because they don't recognize common law marriages they can't add me to his insurance. I read up on Texas common law and found out it's as legal as a real marriage, if we split we'd have to go through a divorce and everything. So shouldn't it be recognized as legally binding in other states?


If you follow the procedures in Texas for an informal marriage, it is just as binding as any other marriage and is recognized in other states, including LA.

Your problem is in telling the employer that it is a "common law marriage". It is not. It is an actual marriage.

You might need a Texas lawyer to write a letter to the employer to clarify this for you. Good luck.

if i'm not mistaken louisiana has their own common law marriage and i think you would have to abide by their regulations. also i think that it is considered common law marriage if a couple has been living together for more than 3 years. but as a resident of louisana they will do anything to screw people out of saving money.

As for "common law" that might depend on the state. As for "legal marriage," the Full, Faith, and Credit Clause in the Constitution provides that marriages from state to state are 'usually' recognized. The issue with this right now is gay marriage. Almost 20(?) states have amended their Constitution making gay marriage illegal, preventing recognition.

To make it binding, why not just go through the civil procedure and get married?

I don't agree with this, but all states continue to recognise common-law marriages lawfully contracted in those U.S. jurisdictions that still permit this irregular contract of a marriage

Why not just go through with a civil ceremony at the courthouse? If you want to reap the benefits of a legal marriage then you should be willing to go through with the actual thing.

Under the Full Faith and Credit clause, it should be recognized in any other state, even those without common law marriage.

some of these laws are tricky. Consult an attorney so you know what you can legally insist on.

What are the requirements to be a Law enforcement officer in New York?

What are the requirements to be a Law enforcement officer in New York? What is the age requirement and what type of classes should be taken, background, etc...


For New York State Trooper, you must have at LEAST a degree in criminal justice and then apply to the police academy (it is on the Averill Harriman State office campus in Albany New York) ---I used to work there.... and attend the police academy.... graduate and then be assigned anywhere throughout the state.... you must be at LEAST 25 and I believe the cut off age is 35 but it could be younger now...be in excellent physical condition and health... be proficient in fire arms and pass all required tests while at the academy... For town police or sheriff patrol, the requirements are ABOUT the same... but the training is a little different....also, you must have NO felony's on your record....or prior arrests...

for state police which i'm going to be its an associates degree in Crim. Jus. and be 21 with nothing over a misdeamenor 2 on your record..be in good health..and complete the 29 week cadet program which pays 1,000$ per week. its 60 credits to get in...college is 60, military is 30..municipal police work is worth 30..prison is worth 15

What is that law called that talks about how technology knowledge doubles every so many years?

I think it starts with an "M" .... M_____ Law or something. I'm writing a report on how fast computer knowledge and technology is developing and I have heard about this law theory and would like to find more info on it.


Moore's Law says that computing power will double every 18 months. I think that's what you're thinking of.

What is that law called that talks about how technology knowledge doubles every so many years?

I think it starts with an "M" .... M_____ Law or something. I'm writing a report on how fast computer knowledge and technology is developing and I have heard about this law theory and would like to find more info on it.


Moore's Law says that computing power will double every 18 months. I think that's what you're thinking of.

How do step up transformers obey the law of conservation of energy?

How do step up transformers obey the law of conservation of energy?


An ideal transformer neither generates nor consumes energy, so the power entering it will equal the power leaving it. Power can be computed by multiplying the RMS voltage by the RMS current. So, if an ideal transformer has an input voltage of (say) 100 V and an output voltage of 200 V, the current coming out will be exactly half the current going in. A real transformer is not ideal but dissipates power owing to the finite resistance of its windings and other effects, so if a real transformer steps up voltage from 100 V to 200 V, its output current will be less than half its input current.

What percentage of Law enforcement officers and agents do you think are corrupt ?

I am not trying to insult any law enforcement officers just merely want to make a consensus

please give an honest opinion I'm a third year Law student

I am open minded and would like opinions and sources please


I think they justify using brute force and tasers on little old women and pregnant women and old men, and pepper spray on kids way too much. Or on anyone for that matter - like the person in the airport who didn't speak English that they killed by tasing him. That might not be corrupt - but it certainly isn't right. I also think there are way more than 2-3% of them corrupt - maybe more like 20-30%. Not to put down the 70-80% of them that are good. (and I wish people on here would stop saying "what's your point" it sounds tooooooo rude).

nah, its 2.344% (down from 2.345 last year)

I don't know. What % of LAWYERS are corrupt?

Plumbers?

Doctors?

Nuurses?

Congressmen?

Senators?

teachers?

Waiters?

Bus boys?

whats your point? You are aware the cops are humans and as such, make mistakes and are subject to the same human weaknesses as ANY profession, correct?

Cops don't come from some super special lab where they get a chip that makes them infalible. They are people and do dumb things.

I can't state percentage, however the kind that has no morals and value towards human rights. They don't just dishonor the badge but they dishonor the laws they swear to up hold.

Less than Three percent.

I was going to say about 3% before I saw the other answers, so now I'm convinced, about 3%....

But I have to agree with nytrainoff... There's corruption in every walk of life.Would we like to think and hope that people entrusted with public service would be more "careful' of there indiscretions, of coarse,but that is wishful thinking...and I would be so frank as to say goes against human nature...

The same amount as the community from which the officers come from. We are all human and come from the same communities, why would you think that someone who becomes a law enforcement officer is any more or less honest than his counterparts?

You have some good answers from that mad guy that wont let anyone add him and sensei and I think one more, Lets face it Hiroko, you are serious, so I'll just say I hope a little less than the rest of us.

I would say 5.5%.

By the way, did you know that 72.6% of all statistics are made up right there on the spot.

It depends upon what you mean by "corrupt".

If "corrupt" means are they organized criminals and murderers, it is less than 10%.

If "corrupt" means they arrest innocent people and then falsify reports, then it is nearly 100%

Depends on what you mean by corrupt, getting a pot head to toss a joint away rather than arresting him could be considered corrupt. You're probably looking for the more dangerous problematic corrupt kind of cops that steal drugs, plant evidence, ect.

I'd have to say a little over 1% maybe 2% of all the police in all the United States are truly corrupt. To some its shocking however divide that percentage by how many states there are and then divide that new percentage by how many cities there are in the state. It's really not that many. Plus it shifts by cycling new corrupts cops in and corrupt cops out on a regular basis.

i would have to say inbetween 50-75 percent

50%

Depends on where you are talking about;

Major state agencies such as California Bureau of Investigation, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division, or Texas Rangers, then less than 1%.

Professional Police Departments such as San Diego PD, Austin PD, or Orlando PD, then 1% to 2%.

Then there’s New Orleans PD, 33% to 69% something like that!

from papers and all stories you read about it and knowing there's some that never get caught, I'd say in the 12-17% range

In Texas: 60% Corrupt, 40% honest by the book

IMO!

well over 75% are corrupt.

I live in Chicago,& the ENTIRE police force is under investigation for abuses.

Sad when you can't feel safe even from the people payed to protect you.

I dont know it because it is so wide in the question

I would say no less than 25 % That crap of 3 % is just crap cops have a code of silence and they will not let the truth be told

2.345%

Given the fact that new stories of corruption and brutality surface each week somewhere in the country, I think of an analogy with cockroaches. When you see two or three, you have hundreds that you can't see, and they hide behind the walls

These are just from this week, in my state:

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?s=7791171

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?s=7766245

Internal Affairs and the "blue code of silence" make the number difficult or impossible to quantify, because they do not reveal statistics on citizen complaints. The "only 1-2% " cops here quote is only the number of situations that come to the public light. I have to say close to 80% of cops are corrupt

How does a bill become a law if the bill is presented in the house of representatives?

Also what actions in the house, the senate, and the Executive office could keep the bill from becoming a law?


ok here we go the first thing that is done is the bill goes to the clerks office where they make copies of it and give it an official number that it will be refered to they will give copies to all member of the house and have a formal first reading in the house. Then the the speaker of the house will assign the bill to a standing committe or several standing committes the more committees that are on the bill the more likely that the bill will be killed. Once in the standing committee the speaker of the committee will assign it to a sub committee which is a group of reperseantatives of the standing committee, it is u[p to them to act on and if they dont the bill is killed and never to be seen again, unless there is a discharge potition which is when 218 members of the house sign a petion to save the bill and send it to second reading state where all of the house of rep. can make amendemnt to the bill. But if the standing committee does act on it and makes amendment then it goes to the rules committee which will then decide how the second reading will be done whether open or closed open is when all member of the house may make changes to it and closed is when just the original standing committee may make changes to it. then it goes on to 3rd reading stage where it is voted on and if passed it goes on to the senate. Then the senate does the first, second, and third reading stages just like the senate but they can add on rider which are amendment that have nothing to do will the actual bill it self and if a senator does not like the bill they might do a fillabuster and just talk for days at a time until the senate dismiss the bill just to end the fillabuster or they can vote on a coture to end the fillabuster. after the senate passes thier version of the bill the house and senate come together in a committee known as the conference committtee and they try to make a version of the bill that will make both the house and the senate happy. after that then it goes back to third reading stage in both the house and the senate and they vote. after that it then goes on to the president where he can veto the act of congress(bill) or pass it.

so it is alot of stuff hence why most bill dont get passed plus it takes alot of time and energy. sorry if there is a lot of misspelling. I tell you US governemt really makes you learn something though.

they have to pass it and then the senate has to pass it and then the president has to pass it and if he veto's it then it has to go through both houses again and if they pass it it's a law.

if enough people don't vote for it then it won't pass.

and sometimes they don't even get around to looking at it for a looooong time or sometimes even at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

if it is passed in the house of reps, it goes to senate, if it passes it goes to pres, he can pass or veto, if pres vetos, congress can pass the bill if the get 2/3 vote

Why would they want to veto anything President Obama wants?

Would entering law school with a degree in International Relations be good?

I have applied to many universities, most notably George Washington U, Vanderbilt U, NYU.

Cost is not a factor for me so I am sure I will be going to one of those.

Would majoring in International Relations be a good tract into Law School?


You've applied to many universities as an undergraduate (those three you listed), or you've applied to those law schools?

I.R. is a fine major if you're going into law school directly. Just be aware that there are nearly no paying job opportunities for people with B.A.s in the field. If you change your mind, you're in a terrible position.

How might you demonstrate this law of conversation of mass for melting ice?

The law of conservation of mass applies to physical changes as well as to chemical changes. How might you demonstrate this law for melting ice?


Put the ice in a plastic bag. But the bag on a scale. Watch closely.

What to do with a political science degree, business minor, and constitutional law degree?

I am a freshman planning on majoring in political science, minoring in International Business - management, and getting a law degree in Constitutional law.

Im also taking Arabic language classes next year and considering ROTC.

What do you think about my proffesional future? Or maybe some ideas for a career?


Why do all this, and then ask what you are going to do? .... you have it back to front!! figure out what rattles your bell then base your education towards the goal.

Yogi has it right. Figure out what you enjoy doing, and tailor your education from that vantage point.

If you burn yourself out too early, you'll be miserable by age 30.

My friend did poly sci.....he's attempting to go to law school.

thtas all i can say really.

Arabic could be good....if you pick up 2 more languages you could be a UN translator.

I mean it seems like its good. Business...poly sci.....arabic....countries like dubai. Really though its not gonna get you too far.

about political scince course you will deal with laws and possible future leader and or employee of a government

]

Become a convention coordinator :)

Ah. The young idealistic political science undergrad. If you're mature you'd figure it out and go with a business management major.

I wanna be a criminal law prosecutor. What universities are good and accomplished in the law field?

I'm currently in my junior year of high school.

My dad wants my major to be open like biology just in case if I decide to go into medicine.

I live in California and my parents don't want me to go out of state, but I really would love to go to NYU or someplace nice on the east coast if they had good law programs! Any suggestions? :D.


Any major four-year university is great. To name a few I would say Yale, Havard, UPENN, Columbia, FSU, MIT etc...

ss

There's really no "pre-law" major. When I went to law school I had classmates who majored in everything in college, including math, science, even music. I majored in Political Science, but nothing really prepares you for law school other than just doing it.

I wanna be a criminal law prosecutor. What universities are good and accomplished in the law field?

I'm currently in my junior year of high school.

My dad wants my major to be open like biology just in case if I decide to go into medicine.

I live in California and my parents don't want me to go out of state, but I really would love to go to NYU or someplace nice on the east coast if they had good law programs! Any suggestions? :D.


Any major four-year university is great. To name a few I would say Yale, Havard, UPENN, Columbia, FSU, MIT etc...

ss

There's really no "pre-law" major. When I went to law school I had classmates who majored in everything in college, including math, science, even music. I majored in Political Science, but nothing really prepares you for law school other than just doing it.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

If the law of Conservation is true, why are people concerned about energy uasge?

Much discussion has focused on the need to drive more efficient cars and use less electricity. If the law of Conservation is true, why are people concerned about energy uasge?


Because if you take the energy and waste it on something useless then someone else would lack this energy.

Not all energy is in a form useful to us.

Mostly they are concerned because it cost money.

Because all energy ends up as wasted heat dissipated into the environment.

Because the energy we are using is solar energy stored up over million of years in the form of oil and coal. We are depleting this form of energy much faster than it can be replaced. Eventually we will have to transition to another form of energy, however, we'd like to avoid a dramatic drop in overall consumption of energy in the process (significantly affecting our society).

Although energy is conserved, its use results in degradation so that it becomes of no further use. Hence, supplies of energy are necessary, and the question of how to obtain such supplies is of the greatest importance to today's economy.

why not

Because - contrary to what people would have you think - it is not energy we use (which is, as you say, conserved) but entropy.

And entropy is not conserved - it rises.

Only low entropy energy is of any use to us. The sort that comes initially from the sun (or nuclear power). You get a lot of energy concentrated into a small number of states - a small number of high energy photons from the sun, for instance. This is low entropy.

Once used in our machines there is precisely the same energy, but it is spread over a lot of states - noise, lots of low energy photons, heat. This is high entropy.

One possible end for the whole universe is for all its energy to be spread uniformly through the maximum possible number of states - everywhere tepid, nowhere hot, everywhere the same.

But its also important to note that black holes have the unusual property of concentrating entropy. A black hole has the highest entropy perunit volume that is possible in the universe.

Because once the energy is consumed to run the car it is used to power the wheels, lights, etc.' Then the energy is acted upon the ground which dissipates the energy and reacts with an opposite force which propels the vehicle.

The problems is that the original form of the energy (gasoline) is now mechanical energy and is of no use once dissipated.

To make is usable again it needs to be gasoline which takes an extremely long process in nature.

Hope that helped

Energy is turned from usable forms to non-usable forms. High energy molecules like gasoline, natural gas, etc, are reacted into low energy ones like water, and CO2 so we can use that energy to do things. Energy waste, in the form of heat and waste products, is unusable with our technology. They contain energy, but we cannot harness it.

People are concerned by energy usage because we are quickly using up all the easily usable forms of energy, which are considered nonrenewable resources. The forms of energy that can be considered everpresent, like solar, geothermal, wind, or hydroelectric, currently cannot account for the total energy usage of the world.

the law of conservation does state that energy can neva be lost but it changes from one state to another. so eventually most of our energy is changed into another state like heat loss or other which we have no use for so it counts as a loss (orginally according to the law its not)

wat would be most efficient in these energy loss concernes is to be abke to recycle this energy (leg. lost heat energy) so that its no longer a loss but energy for us to use all over again..

hopefully soon there would be a solution for these concerns:)

thats one of those things that i refuse to focus on, ever.

If the law of Conservation is true, why are people concerned about energy uasge?

Much discussion has focused on the need to drive more efficient cars and use less electricity. If the law of Conservation is true, why are people concerned about energy uasge?


Because if you take the energy and waste it on something useless then someone else would lack this energy.

Not all energy is in a form useful to us.

Mostly they are concerned because it cost money.

Because all energy ends up as wasted heat dissipated into the environment.

Because the energy we are using is solar energy stored up over million of years in the form of oil and coal. We are depleting this form of energy much faster than it can be replaced. Eventually we will have to transition to another form of energy, however, we'd like to avoid a dramatic drop in overall consumption of energy in the process (significantly affecting our society).

Although energy is conserved, its use results in degradation so that it becomes of no further use. Hence, supplies of energy are necessary, and the question of how to obtain such supplies is of the greatest importance to today's economy.

why not

Because - contrary to what people would have you think - it is not energy we use (which is, as you say, conserved) but entropy.

And entropy is not conserved - it rises.

Only low entropy energy is of any use to us. The sort that comes initially from the sun (or nuclear power). You get a lot of energy concentrated into a small number of states - a small number of high energy photons from the sun, for instance. This is low entropy.

Once used in our machines there is precisely the same energy, but it is spread over a lot of states - noise, lots of low energy photons, heat. This is high entropy.

One possible end for the whole universe is for all its energy to be spread uniformly through the maximum possible number of states - everywhere tepid, nowhere hot, everywhere the same.

But its also important to note that black holes have the unusual property of concentrating entropy. A black hole has the highest entropy perunit volume that is possible in the universe.

Because once the energy is consumed to run the car it is used to power the wheels, lights, etc.' Then the energy is acted upon the ground which dissipates the energy and reacts with an opposite force which propels the vehicle.

The problems is that the original form of the energy (gasoline) is now mechanical energy and is of no use once dissipated.

To make is usable again it needs to be gasoline which takes an extremely long process in nature.

Hope that helped

Energy is turned from usable forms to non-usable forms. High energy molecules like gasoline, natural gas, etc, are reacted into low energy ones like water, and CO2 so we can use that energy to do things. Energy waste, in the form of heat and waste products, is unusable with our technology. They contain energy, but we cannot harness it.

People are concerned by energy usage because we are quickly using up all the easily usable forms of energy, which are considered nonrenewable resources. The forms of energy that can be considered everpresent, like solar, geothermal, wind, or hydroelectric, currently cannot account for the total energy usage of the world.

the law of conservation does state that energy can neva be lost but it changes from one state to another. so eventually most of our energy is changed into another state like heat loss or other which we have no use for so it counts as a loss (orginally according to the law its not)

wat would be most efficient in these energy loss concernes is to be abke to recycle this energy (leg. lost heat energy) so that its no longer a loss but energy for us to use all over again..

hopefully soon there would be a solution for these concerns:)

thats one of those things that i refuse to focus on, ever.

Raoult's Law - Why does the volume increase and the mixture cool in a system with positive deviation?

Ethanol-cyclohexane system shows positive deviation from Raoult's Law. Why is this in molecular terms, and why does the volume increase and the mixture cool on mixing in a system displaying positive deviation?

Thank you in advance.


in +ve deviation the interaction of solute(A) and solvent(B) molecules is less than interaction of A-A or B-B molecules. so the volume increases and deltaH>0

Raoult's Law - Why does the volume increase and the mixture cool in a system with positive deviation?

Ethanol-cyclohexane system shows positive deviation from Raoult's Law. Why is this in molecular terms, and why does the volume increase and the mixture cool on mixing in a system displaying positive deviation?

Thank you in advance.


in +ve deviation the interaction of solute(A) and solvent(B) molecules is less than interaction of A-A or B-B molecules. so the volume increases and deltaH>0

What other suit colors can i wear in a law firm that requires business attire during the summer?

I have a summer internship/clerkship in a law firm and the dress code is business attire. Aside from Gray, Black, Navy Blue colors in a suit, is it appropriate to wear other colors? and what will be suited in that kind of work place environment?

Thank you very much!


Tan, or a linen suit, sounds a bit cliche I know but I have seen some very nice ones.

Would entering law school with a degree in International Relations be good?

I have applied to many universities, most notably George Washington U, Vanderbilt U, NYU.

Cost is not a factor for me so I am sure I will be going to one of those.

Would majoring in International Relations be a good tract into Law School?


Hi Dan,

Yes, it would be a good educational background for you to have this degree. Of course, it depends on what you do with your education and how you utilize it.

I recommend that you find an internship after your first year of Law School somewhere in DC with an international organization or with a congressmen/senator that serves on a foreign relations (or related) committee. If you are at NYU, you could find something at the UN.

Your summer after your second year of lawschool should be at a lawfirm or a legal services organization focusing on international law (Human Rights, Nation Building etc.)

Just do well your first year as that really sets the tone for your next 2 years.

Yes.

Is it possible to land a career in federal law enforcement with a bachelors degree in criminal justice?

I just wanted to know of some agencies that accept these degrees. I know the fbi wants others but what about ncis, dea, us marshal, and others like private investigation firms?Also what are some other agencies of law enforcement and investigation that hire these degree holders? thanks!


This is going to sound weird, but study accounting. Federal Law Enforcement Agencies need agents who can do financial and accounting types of investigations. Really most degrees should suffice. The real answer is that they don't just look at the degree, it's the whole package. Get your BA, then go for a Masters degree or foreign language and get some work experience (law enforcement is a plus, but really any kind of real world work is good). They hire all types of backgrounds. Do something different and unique, don't follow the rest of the LE crowd and study criminal justice. You will learn that stuff at the academy.

you can be a cop normally the federal agencies try to recruit a lot of their people out of the military. the military is basically their job interview and if they like what they saw over the last 4 years they offer you the chance to be with them.

All of them.

Is it possible to land a career in federal law enforcement with a bachelors degree in criminal justice?

I just wanted to know of some agencies that accept these degrees. I know the fbi wants others but what about ncis, dea, us marshal, and others like private investigation firms?Also what are some other agencies of law enforcement and investigation that hire these degree holders? thanks!


This is going to sound weird, but study accounting. Federal Law Enforcement Agencies need agents who can do financial and accounting types of investigations. Really most degrees should suffice. The real answer is that they don't just look at the degree, it's the whole package. Get your BA, then go for a Masters degree or foreign language and get some work experience (law enforcement is a plus, but really any kind of real world work is good). They hire all types of backgrounds. Do something different and unique, don't follow the rest of the LE crowd and study criminal justice. You will learn that stuff at the academy.

you can be a cop normally the federal agencies try to recruit a lot of their people out of the military. the military is basically their job interview and if they like what they saw over the last 4 years they offer you the chance to be with them.

All of them.

How would an informational interview with the senior partner of a major law firm benefit me?

Mediocre grades, tier 3/4 law school, no journal experience, 3 years of document review/contract attorney work. I am not expecting a job offer or even a job interview.

What can I expect from this meeting?

What kinds of things would the senior partner tell me?

Are the huge firms interested in current practicing attorneys if they only hire from law school?


You can expect to get out of the meeting what you put into it. Leading with the negatives on your resume will not help at all.

What kind of law do you have a passion for? Why did you set up this meeting with this senior partner?

Why not expect to get something, even if it is a contact to someone else who is hiring. The whole point of an informational interview is to figure out what they desire in associates/partners and how you can prepare yourself to be what either they or their peers are looking for.

Have you ever conducted an informational interview? You need to be prepared with what information YOU want to know. Have you googled the terms "informational interview?"

If the senior partner is gregarious or outgoing, etc..., he or she could help you a lot; they might give you substantial information without having to pull teeth to get it. If not, they might not be much help at all.

I assume you set up the informational interview, so the burden is on you to conduct it. Have questions ready. If you did not pick this person because you want to do the same kind of law, this could be a failed informational interview. Get in touch with your motives behind this. Sounds like you are a bit confused about what you want.

So, I'm not sure what point you are at in your life, but the answer to your question is one word: networking.

How would an informational interview with the senior partner of a major law firm benefit me?

Mediocre grades, tier 3/4 law school, no journal experience, 3 years of document review/contract attorney work. I am not expecting a job offer or even a job interview.

What can I expect from this meeting?

What kinds of things would the senior partner tell me?

Are the huge firms interested in current practicing attorneys if they only hire from law school?


You can expect to get out of the meeting what you put into it. Leading with the negatives on your resume will not help at all.

What kind of law do you have a passion for? Why did you set up this meeting with this senior partner?

Why not expect to get something, even if it is a contact to someone else who is hiring. The whole point of an informational interview is to figure out what they desire in associates/partners and how you can prepare yourself to be what either they or their peers are looking for.

Have you ever conducted an informational interview? You need to be prepared with what information YOU want to know. Have you googled the terms "informational interview?"

If the senior partner is gregarious or outgoing, etc..., he or she could help you a lot; they might give you substantial information without having to pull teeth to get it. If not, they might not be much help at all.

I assume you set up the informational interview, so the burden is on you to conduct it. Have questions ready. If you did not pick this person because you want to do the same kind of law, this could be a failed informational interview. Get in touch with your motives behind this. Sounds like you are a bit confused about what you want.

So, I'm not sure what point you are at in your life, but the answer to your question is one word: networking.

What do u think about aiding and abeting criminal law?

What do u think about aiding and abeting criminal law?

hello.

in case you haven't heard about such law, here it goes:

A criminal charge of aiding and abetting or accessory can usually be brought against anyone who helps in the commission of a crime, though legal distinctions vary by state.

my questions.

what do you think about that law? do you think it's important? is it fair? why do such law exists?

thank you.


Here is a very good example:

http://www.lawfiles.net/question.php?QuestionId=2030

and

http://www.lawfiles.net/reply.php?ReplyId=690

This is a legal question and answer submitted by someone to an attorney. The question I would ask you is, would you like to be the person who got ripped off on this one or would you like to hold this person accountable?

From her question, she did everything to facilitate the crime. Why not hold her accountable for her actions? Why should the victim be without recourse against her?

I don't think that you should be hiding out a criminal by no means. If it was something major especially (voilence, burgulary, etc.).

If I knew that someone was actually wanting to hide out at my house that was like that I would have to question my own judge of character. I think this is pretty much how the police officer's look at it to.

Since this is your HW, a few leading quesitons for you.

If someone hurt your mother (or loved one), and a second person helped them, or didn't rat them out, would you want them punished?

What if it was robbing them of $100K?

What if it was murder?

Of course, anyone who knows anything should come forward!

Hey, if you had any part in the crime, you are just as guilty as the primary criminal.

How are law school classes different than undergraduate classes?

I'm currently an undergraduate planning on attending law school. Is the format the same (lecture, midterm, paper, final exam)? Or is it different. Also, which one requires more work?


w3 tutorial-http://w3schooling.info

Law school is considerably more work with tons of reading and class preparation. In some classes, your entire grade is based on the final exam. The professors also make a point of calling on students to explain the basics and fine points of particular cases, so you always have to be prepared ahead of time. You can't just cram for an exam, because you actually have to know this stuff for your career, so you truly have to learn it. Law school, like med school, requires good time management and personal discipline.

It is nothing like undergraduate school.

Your days will consist of nothing more than you sitting in a law library and that chair will slowly become your new best friend. You are going to being spending countless, hours, days and weeks in there simply preparing cases and briefs your next classes. Once in class the professor may or may not call your name, and if they do, then you better hope you are prepared well and know case inside and out and are well versed on your side of the argument or issue in question. If you are unprepared then it is going to be the worst 20-30 minutes of your life, and lest not mention that you may get a professor from hell, who take you down a letter grade for not being ready.

I suggest you read up on the Socratic method if you do not know what this is already, because you will get professors who teach via this.

There are no mid-terms. Your general day will be: Wake up, work on your class work, attend lectures, then continue working on your class work. If you are lucky, you may fit some sleep in there, that is if you can after all of the stimulation and caffeine in your system.

You're who grade is generally based off of one final exam.

The fun to be had.

Grades: Entire grade is usually based on one exam at the end of the semester. Not an undergrad exam. The essay portion will just be a set of facts and you have to apply the law you learned the entire semester. The best way to get points is not being right (this person should win) but instead by spotting all of the legal issues presented and analyzing them.

Some upper level classes will have a paper instead of a final. The paper is usually required to be at least 25 pages and is a much more submersive project than undergraduate writing.

Class: NO LECTURES. There are not lectures in law school. You read about 40 pages per class (about 400 a week total) and go to class. Your professor will then call on students and random and drill them with questions about that days assignment.

It is WAY more difficult than undergrad. This is a graduate program, and a difficult one at that. It requires a LOT of self discipline to force yourself to do homework for about 50-60 hours a week PLUS making it to every class as you usually only get around 2-4 absences before being booted.

I got through undergrad with barely even cracking a book. this is just impossible in law school. It is a BIG lifestyle change from undergrad.

Why are so many Law Enforcement officers on Yahoo Answers so biased against the average citizen?

It seems that if anyone asks a question or gives and answer that reflects Law Enforcement negatively, they are labeled as criminals, ignorant or slandered in some way or another. No one is perfect and this goes for law enforcement too. There are some bad members of law enforcement out there and to pretend that law enforcement officers are immaculate only damages your image. Why is there a bias against the average citizen by Law Enforcement on this site?


I think you can read through some of your answers and see why some Police Officers make the comments that they do. People use this site to make negative comment after negative comment.

In a Police Officer's line of work, it's almost the same. People don't use this site to praise or thank Police Officers. They use it to vent or make ignorant uneducated comments. In the line of duty, a Police Officer very rarely gets praised or thanked by the citizen he works so many hours and so hard (while risking his life) to protect. People make no effort to call in Police Supervisor to comment on what a great thing a Police Officer did. Only to complain. A newspaper isn't going to print all of the great things a Police Officer did during a shift- only when a mistake is made. I think it could just be frustration.

I have a feeling that some Officers, like some citizens, just use this site to vent. If you read through some of the top contributers under this section, you'll see there are some really smart, very polite Officers posting answers. None of which are biased or insulting...

Police are just normal people doing a job like any of us they deserve no more respect than a construction worker, waitress,nurse,computer operator there just normal people and why people think there better than anyone else is beyond me. Get over yourselves, quit acting better than everyone else your just people trying to make a living like everybody else

Guess that makes me above average since I have gotten any negativity from neither people who despise law enforcement or law enforcement in general.

Its all how you ask and answer. Treat people as people and there should be no negativity. If there is, then obviously the individual can't handle the discussion.

Why? Are you a criminal?

That's a joke.. just remember, the typical law enforcement officer is exposed to the worst people imaginable every work day. It's not often that they get called-out to witness a baby's birth or something..

More often than not, they're dealing with disputes between folks that try to manipulate the situation to their own favor. They are lied to on a constant basis, not to mention threatened as well. They deal with folks that could potentially knife them, shoot them, or beat them down at any given moment on the job.

As a result, there's always a suspicion that strangers are trying to exploit some kind of loophole, and trying to get away with stuff they shouldn't be doing.

Also, many of the answers in this section aren't even FROM law enforcement officials, they come from folks who beleive in the laws and have the utmost respect for the police. Unfortunately, these aren't the folks that the police get to meet.

Plus, around here, folks tend to use the fact that they're partially annonymous to launch ridiculous attacks against them..

For example, the obvious drug user that called the police "retards".. it's like, the police aren't the retarded ones when you sit there and think you're cool because you made fun of someone who's job is to help protect you and your family/friends from folks that might otherwise try to harm or steal from you..

When they are under attack on here so much, it makes sense that they might try to be defensive in their posts. They are trained to achieve the upper hand right at the beginning of any situation.

Law enforcement officers are folks who mean well ( or perhaps meant well), and they took oaths to maintain justice by upholding the law. They don't define the laws, but they DO have to uphold them. When you have a problem with the laws.. you don't have a problem with the police, you have a problem with the lawmakers, until you start breaking those laws.

Sure there are a few law enforcement officers out there with a chip on their shoulder, but there's also a few citizens like that too.

You asked the question by using the same derogatory remarks you claim all cops do. You grouped all cops that are on answers as mean, rude and negative. I for one try to treat all people the way they treat me. If I am treated rudely, that shows me that the person treating me like this will not respond to nice treatment, because of their out look.

You need to supply some examples of these questions that "...reflect negatively on Law Enforcement."

It's my guess that they are slanderous and not backed by any facts, and law enforcement people are simply defending themselves.

give any little farty person a bit of power .......look at little Napolian.

You have to understand that cops do not deal with the AVERAGE citizen...they deal with the ****heads...and dealing with these people everyday makes a lot of us very critical and sometimes frustrated and angry. Its always the same story, the same lies (EVERYone lies to you) the same problems, the SAME PEOPLE. Granted, we do get to work with decent human being every now and again...which is nice and we feel good about helping. However, most of us are jaded and when people ask or do things negatively we get upset and might say things because what we do is hard, depressing, emotional work a lot of times and a lot of us don't feel appreciated. True, cops should def be more understanding and not snap back at people or call them names just for asking questions, but I'm just explaining why some of them do this. And yes, there ARE bad members of law enforcement. But most of us are just trying to do a job which we akin to "babysitting" the city and its hard to see the good we do in our jobs sometimes.

If you have a negative opinion of the police, I am very sorry. However, I will not harass you on a personal level like some on this site tend to do to police. I may have in the past, but not anymore. But remember it could always be worse. you could see us walking around in BDUs carrying AK-47s and being judge, jury and executioner, like in many countries.

OR when the police decide not to protect the public and strike, all chaos breaks loose. You do not, or never will know what we go through, all to protect the public, who as a whole has a positive view of the police. The simple fact is, you need us.

"On September 9, 1919 1,117 BPD officers went on strike at 5:45 p.m.[7] One hundred Metropolitan Park Police were brought in to replace the striking officers, but 58 of these refused. Despite assurances from Curtis to Peters and Governor Calvin Coolidge, Boston had no police protection for the night of September 9, as the volunteer police officers were not told to report until the following morning.[8]

The city soon fell into riots and public chaos as over three-fourths of the department was no longer enforcing public peace.[4] Large crowds, including a number of sailors from docked naval ships, took to the streets, smashing windows, committing robbery and stoning bystanders and cars.[9] The northern, southern, and western areas of the city were all taken over by armed gangs, despite the 300 officers that were still on duty. "

P.S. I try to afford any person the same level of respect they show me.

Law enforcement IS a difficult profession, and many officers ARE quite sensitive to anything which reflects poorly on their profession and/or them. They have a right to feel that way, just as doctors in the '50s and '60s felt unjustly criticized for the perceived incompetence of a very few of their colleagues who were allowed to continue practicing because it was the AMA who checked complaints. The same situation applies here. Less than 5% of all police officers are incompetent or bullies, but they have definitely turned public opinion downward as it regards police officers. How many times have you seen a police car, no lights or siren, go speeding by you on the highway 15 to 20 mph over the speed limit only to see it parked at a restaurant, and the officers eating? Then, you get stopped for doing 6mph over the speed limit? It doesn't seem fair or equitable, does it? Many officers don't do that, but enough do that it creates a sense that police officers MUST consider themselves above the law, so why should we respect them? Unfortunately, the innocent officers are the ones caught in the middle.

Law Enforcement officers don’t consider themselves as citizens they consider themselves as authority figures over the citizens.

The days of the police being part of the community are long gone. They should be getting to know those in the community living in it and protecting and helping those who need it.

The police should be out to serve and protect but the truth is they are not allowed to do this. They are encouraged to spend time writing tickets which is income for the city they work for.

You obviously are not reading or understanding a lot of the "questions" concerning law enforcement officers here. I put the word question in quotations because most of them I see here are just disguised slams. I see few positive comments here about any law enforcement people.

Well, you can skim down the responses you have gotten so far and it's pretty much self-explanatory. These people are just as bigoted as anyone else. Why do I say that? because every time an Officer is found committing a crime or something else bad, some people then think that ALL Police Officers are corrupt.

I don't expect anyone to kiss my *** because of the work I do. But I see a serious lack of comprehension and understanding to the situations that we have to deal with. When someone states that we don't view ourselves as "Civilians" well, guess what? I do all of the same things that you do in life, pay taxes, own a home have a family or whatever.

Most of the critics are no different than what we encounter when on the job. Self-absorbed people that think the world revolves around what they think and don't like being told the opposite.

There is no bias, the only reason cops get mad is because citizens accuse cops of dong crazy things they don't do, of breaking laws they don't break, and somehow consider speeding tickets bogus violations. The only bias here is on cops.

Because the questions many asked are not questions but derogatory remarks veiled in a question

Put yourself in their shoes. You deal with the worst people society has to offer on a daily basis. Drug users, drunks, wife beaters, etc. If you are a traffic cop and pull people over for speeding, your not dealing with pleasant happy customers. I salute the cops, I couldn't handle that job. It would drive me insane.

We deal with people at their worst and are required to tell it like it is. Some people are like children and do not like to be told various facts because it goes against what they want to hear. If anything it's the other way around and people tend to knock the Police even though we merely enforce laws that you "average citizens" voted on. I think a great deal of hostility cops put out is due to a real lack of appreciation but it is part of the job that causes cynicism to a high degree. It is one of the reasons many L.E.commit suicide because they never make it out of the "Us and "Them" stage and we are heavily outnumbered. I try not to be the way you decribe and truely like helping people but if you attack a cop you will not be ignored most of the time.

Hmmm, because we can.

law enforcers let the badge go to their head. let them step out of the uniform and from behind the badge you will see they are nothing but puzzes. where i live all they do is harass people. and they wonder why people are hitting them. go figure. police officers should be made to go to collage for 5 years and learn how to deal with the public and act like they want their jobs. i can't stand pigs.

'Police are just normal people doing a job like any of us they deserve no more respect than a construction worker, waitress,nurse,computer operator there just normal people...'

**************************************...

Yes we are. So treat us with the respect that you show to others. Not less.

It gives them reason to abuse the respected authority given to them. Some of them are just arrogant Neanderthals that get a kick out being someone that has that sort of demeanor and can pretty much get away with it. They need some sort of motivation, to be as corrupt as some of them are. They also, put up with a lot of B.S for just doing their job a lot of times. They're people too, eventually they'll get over harassing folks! I don't like 'em, but respect them for taking the risks they take!

Because cops are just JERK-OFFS!

Why are so many Law Enforcement officers on Yahoo Answers so biased against the average citizen?

It seems that if anyone asks a question or gives and answer that reflects Law Enforcement negatively, they are labeled as criminals, ignorant or slandered in some way or another. No one is perfect and this goes for law enforcement too. There are some bad members of law enforcement out there and to pretend that law enforcement officers are immaculate only damages your image. Why is there a bias against the average citizen by Law Enforcement on this site?


I think you can read through some of your answers and see why some Police Officers make the comments that they do. People use this site to make negative comment after negative comment.

In a Police Officer's line of work, it's almost the same. People don't use this site to praise or thank Police Officers. They use it to vent or make ignorant uneducated comments. In the line of duty, a Police Officer very rarely gets praised or thanked by the citizen he works so many hours and so hard (while risking his life) to protect. People make no effort to call in Police Supervisor to comment on what a great thing a Police Officer did. Only to complain. A newspaper isn't going to print all of the great things a Police Officer did during a shift- only when a mistake is made. I think it could just be frustration.

I have a feeling that some Officers, like some citizens, just use this site to vent. If you read through some of the top contributers under this section, you'll see there are some really smart, very polite Officers posting answers. None of which are biased or insulting...

Police are just normal people doing a job like any of us they deserve no more respect than a construction worker, waitress,nurse,computer operator there just normal people and why people think there better than anyone else is beyond me. Get over yourselves, quit acting better than everyone else your just people trying to make a living like everybody else

Guess that makes me above average since I have gotten any negativity from neither people who despise law enforcement or law enforcement in general.

Its all how you ask and answer. Treat people as people and there should be no negativity. If there is, then obviously the individual can't handle the discussion.

Why? Are you a criminal?

That's a joke.. just remember, the typical law enforcement officer is exposed to the worst people imaginable every work day. It's not often that they get called-out to witness a baby's birth or something..

More often than not, they're dealing with disputes between folks that try to manipulate the situation to their own favor. They are lied to on a constant basis, not to mention threatened as well. They deal with folks that could potentially knife them, shoot them, or beat them down at any given moment on the job.

As a result, there's always a suspicion that strangers are trying to exploit some kind of loophole, and trying to get away with stuff they shouldn't be doing.

Also, many of the answers in this section aren't even FROM law enforcement officials, they come from folks who beleive in the laws and have the utmost respect for the police. Unfortunately, these aren't the folks that the police get to meet.

Plus, around here, folks tend to use the fact that they're partially annonymous to launch ridiculous attacks against them..

For example, the obvious drug user that called the police "retards".. it's like, the police aren't the retarded ones when you sit there and think you're cool because you made fun of someone who's job is to help protect you and your family/friends from folks that might otherwise try to harm or steal from you..

When they are under attack on here so much, it makes sense that they might try to be defensive in their posts. They are trained to achieve the upper hand right at the beginning of any situation.

Law enforcement officers are folks who mean well ( or perhaps meant well), and they took oaths to maintain justice by upholding the law. They don't define the laws, but they DO have to uphold them. When you have a problem with the laws.. you don't have a problem with the police, you have a problem with the lawmakers, until you start breaking those laws.

Sure there are a few law enforcement officers out there with a chip on their shoulder, but there's also a few citizens like that too.

You asked the question by using the same derogatory remarks you claim all cops do. You grouped all cops that are on answers as mean, rude and negative. I for one try to treat all people the way they treat me. If I am treated rudely, that shows me that the person treating me like this will not respond to nice treatment, because of their out look.

You need to supply some examples of these questions that "...reflect negatively on Law Enforcement."

It's my guess that they are slanderous and not backed by any facts, and law enforcement people are simply defending themselves.

give any little farty person a bit of power .......look at little Napolian.

You have to understand that cops do not deal with the AVERAGE citizen...they deal with the ****heads...and dealing with these people everyday makes a lot of us very critical and sometimes frustrated and angry. Its always the same story, the same lies (EVERYone lies to you) the same problems, the SAME PEOPLE. Granted, we do get to work with decent human being every now and again...which is nice and we feel good about helping. However, most of us are jaded and when people ask or do things negatively we get upset and might say things because what we do is hard, depressing, emotional work a lot of times and a lot of us don't feel appreciated. True, cops should def be more understanding and not snap back at people or call them names just for asking questions, but I'm just explaining why some of them do this. And yes, there ARE bad members of law enforcement. But most of us are just trying to do a job which we akin to "babysitting" the city and its hard to see the good we do in our jobs sometimes.

If you have a negative opinion of the police, I am very sorry. However, I will not harass you on a personal level like some on this site tend to do to police. I may have in the past, but not anymore. But remember it could always be worse. you could see us walking around in BDUs carrying AK-47s and being judge, jury and executioner, like in many countries.

OR when the police decide not to protect the public and strike, all chaos breaks loose. You do not, or never will know what we go through, all to protect the public, who as a whole has a positive view of the police. The simple fact is, you need us.

"On September 9, 1919 1,117 BPD officers went on strike at 5:45 p.m.[7] One hundred Metropolitan Park Police were brought in to replace the striking officers, but 58 of these refused. Despite assurances from Curtis to Peters and Governor Calvin Coolidge, Boston had no police protection for the night of September 9, as the volunteer police officers were not told to report until the following morning.[8]

The city soon fell into riots and public chaos as over three-fourths of the department was no longer enforcing public peace.[4] Large crowds, including a number of sailors from docked naval ships, took to the streets, smashing windows, committing robbery and stoning bystanders and cars.[9] The northern, southern, and western areas of the city were all taken over by armed gangs, despite the 300 officers that were still on duty. "

P.S. I try to afford any person the same level of respect they show me.

Law enforcement IS a difficult profession, and many officers ARE quite sensitive to anything which reflects poorly on their profession and/or them. They have a right to feel that way, just as doctors in the '50s and '60s felt unjustly criticized for the perceived incompetence of a very few of their colleagues who were allowed to continue practicing because it was the AMA who checked complaints. The same situation applies here. Less than 5% of all police officers are incompetent or bullies, but they have definitely turned public opinion downward as it regards police officers. How many times have you seen a police car, no lights or siren, go speeding by you on the highway 15 to 20 mph over the speed limit only to see it parked at a restaurant, and the officers eating? Then, you get stopped for doing 6mph over the speed limit? It doesn't seem fair or equitable, does it? Many officers don't do that, but enough do that it creates a sense that police officers MUST consider themselves above the law, so why should we respect them? Unfortunately, the innocent officers are the ones caught in the middle.

Law Enforcement officers don’t consider themselves as citizens they consider themselves as authority figures over the citizens.

The days of the police being part of the community are long gone. They should be getting to know those in the community living in it and protecting and helping those who need it.

The police should be out to serve and protect but the truth is they are not allowed to do this. They are encouraged to spend time writing tickets which is income for the city they work for.

You obviously are not reading or understanding a lot of the "questions" concerning law enforcement officers here. I put the word question in quotations because most of them I see here are just disguised slams. I see few positive comments here about any law enforcement people.

Well, you can skim down the responses you have gotten so far and it's pretty much self-explanatory. These people are just as bigoted as anyone else. Why do I say that? because every time an Officer is found committing a crime or something else bad, some people then think that ALL Police Officers are corrupt.

I don't expect anyone to kiss my *** because of the work I do. But I see a serious lack of comprehension and understanding to the situations that we have to deal with. When someone states that we don't view ourselves as "Civilians" well, guess what? I do all of the same things that you do in life, pay taxes, own a home have a family or whatever.

Most of the critics are no different than what we encounter when on the job. Self-absorbed people that think the world revolves around what they think and don't like being told the opposite.

There is no bias, the only reason cops get mad is because citizens accuse cops of dong crazy things they don't do, of breaking laws they don't break, and somehow consider speeding tickets bogus violations. The only bias here is on cops.

Because the questions many asked are not questions but derogatory remarks veiled in a question

Put yourself in their shoes. You deal with the worst people society has to offer on a daily basis. Drug users, drunks, wife beaters, etc. If you are a traffic cop and pull people over for speeding, your not dealing with pleasant happy customers. I salute the cops, I couldn't handle that job. It would drive me insane.

We deal with people at their worst and are required to tell it like it is. Some people are like children and do not like to be told various facts because it goes against what they want to hear. If anything it's the other way around and people tend to knock the Police even though we merely enforce laws that you "average citizens" voted on. I think a great deal of hostility cops put out is due to a real lack of appreciation but it is part of the job that causes cynicism to a high degree. It is one of the reasons many L.E.commit suicide because they never make it out of the "Us and "Them" stage and we are heavily outnumbered. I try not to be the way you decribe and truely like helping people but if you attack a cop you will not be ignored most of the time.

Hmmm, because we can.

law enforcers let the badge go to their head. let them step out of the uniform and from behind the badge you will see they are nothing but puzzes. where i live all they do is harass people. and they wonder why people are hitting them. go figure. police officers should be made to go to collage for 5 years and learn how to deal with the public and act like they want their jobs. i can't stand pigs.

'Police are just normal people doing a job like any of us they deserve no more respect than a construction worker, waitress,nurse,computer operator there just normal people...'

**************************************...

Yes we are. So treat us with the respect that you show to others. Not less.

It gives them reason to abuse the respected authority given to them. Some of them are just arrogant Neanderthals that get a kick out being someone that has that sort of demeanor and can pretty much get away with it. They need some sort of motivation, to be as corrupt as some of them are. They also, put up with a lot of B.S for just doing their job a lot of times. They're people too, eventually they'll get over harassing folks! I don't like 'em, but respect them for taking the risks they take!

Because cops are just JERK-OFFS!