It really only takes getting a "D" or being mediocre/nearly deficient to get your law license because it's a pass/fail exam. The bar exam doesn't really keep those that shouldn't practice from practicing, the market does. Edit: I guess what I was trying to say is that I think there are definitely people that have passed the bar that in no way, shape or form would I allow them to handle any legal matters of my own. You get what you pay for I suppose.<div>
</div><div>And in response to patdog, I refer to LobLaw's answer. Most of the time, it's those with good jobs that will respond to those survey's, not the other way around. This, obviously, skews the numbers (and yes I was speaking more of salary than anything else) to those that are not at all representative of the employment for my class as a whole. </div><div>
</div><div><span style="font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to do a lot of legal work and people need access to affordable legal services. Allowing more people to become lawyers would give it to them.
</span><br style="min-width: 0px; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "></div><div><span style="font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">
</span></div><div>The only problem I have with that sentiment is the life altering nature of a lot of legal services and professional responsibilities: confidentiality of a client's sensitive information, wills/trusts, and especially escrow accounts, just as a few examples. Because it's so easy to pass the bar, I think the rigors of law school and eventually the market are certainly needed as a check on incompetent lawyers potentially screwing up people's lives.</div><div>
</div><div>Sorry for the bump, I'll get off the soap box.</div>