A lot of 1Ls are very worried about being seen as "gunners." Here are a few thoughts about what it means to be a gunner, and whether it is good or bad. (Thread) /1
There's no perfect definition of what a "gunner" is, but it's usually used as law-school speak for someone with open and unbridled ambition who loves to talk about his views, his career plans, and the like. /2
You hear a lot about "gunners" because there's a sense in which law school is a zero sum game. You're typically graded on a curve, and the best jobs and prestigious positions are necessarily limited. A gunner is open about his ambitions to "win" those competitions vs. others. /3
Being that kind of gunner is obnoxious b/c it comes off as wanting others to lose. No one likes that person. With that said, 1Ls often think, wrongly, that a gunner is someone who often speaks in class. Some who raise their hand a lot in class are gunners, but many aren't. /4
Some people raise their hand often because they have good questions, or they have brief and interesting points to make. In my view, that's not being a gunner; that's just being an active participant. A student who asks good questions and makes interesting points is helping /5
the students and the prof, which is good for everyone. In contrast, the stereotype of the gunner is that he just wants to hear himself talk; he's so into his own views he doesn't notice they're not helping the class discussion. A good prof will limit that, but some don't. /6
My own recommendation is to be an active participant in class, if you're comfortable with it. Keep contributions short, and don't be in love with your views; you're trying to help discussion, not take it over. /7
But don't fall into the trap, urged by some who don't understand of the point of law school class discussions, of thinking that anyone who speaks in class is a "gunner." /end
Incidentally, this thread reminds me of a favorite gunner moment from my 1L year. A class ended with a really sharp student comment that the professor complimented. With class over, one student in front of me said to another, "What a great comment." The other responded,
"It was a good comment, but it wasn't a DC-Circuit-clerk level comment. Maybe another circuit." This student had in her mind a prestige ranking of every circuit, and she was evaluating comments based on how their perceived quality matched up to her perceptions of the clerks of
different circuits. We were 1Ls. /end
